Apple M3 Pro Chip Has 25% Less Memory Bandwidth Than M1/M2 Pro

[Velli]

Was not the M3 expected to be a architecture step? My biggest concern when the more or less fantastic M1 was released that it would hard to scale things up. And it seems like so. Intel and AMD have made huge steps and are now a lot faster than apple. (But way less efficient). But this wont do in the long run, they need to keep up with competition.

I haven't followed Intel closely at all, but my understanding is that Intel's "huge steps" are basically a result of running them hotter, not architecture improvements. M3 is same speed as M1 at half the power. I'd say that is pretty impressive.

 

[A7ibaba]

It seems they overengineered first gen M1 pro/max and with every other iterations they cut cost where ever they can. Substrate on CPU , cooler , now they cut the bandwidth

 

[Ivander]

Then I gladly keeping my 16" M1 Pro MBP. My wallet says "thank you", Apple.

 

[DEMinSoCAL]

Then I gladly keeping my 16" M1 Pro MBP. My wallet says "thank you", Apple.

Me too. Check out this comparison of 16" M3 Pro vs M2 Pro vs M1 Pro. Scroll down and see if there is anything, apart from more cores, etc., that is that much different between the 2021 and 2023 versions:

MacBook Pro - MacBook Pro 14-in (M4) vs MacBook Pro 14-in (M4 Pro or M4 Max) vs MacBook Pro 16-in (M4 Pro or M4 Max)

Compare the MacBook Pro 14-in (M4) with other laptops like the MacBook Pro 14-in (M4 Pro or M4 Max) and MacBook Pro 16-in (M4 Pro or M4 Max). Find the one that’s perfect for you.

www.apple.com

I didn't see anything I needed that my 16" M1 Pro doesn't already have...

 

[MallardDuck]

It seems like the architectural difference between M1, M2, and M3 is minuscule. And there is no architectural difference within the same SKU. Going from MX, to MX Pro, to MX Max, to MX Ultra is more or less about upping the core counts, and when this is not possible, they end up fusing multiple SoCs.

Nothing wrong with any of this, of course. But I would have expected more advancement on the architectural part itself. Pretty much all improvements seem linked to improvement in process technique and the possibility of adding more transistors using the same amount of space—barely any improvements to the cores themselves.

My m1 max with 64 gb is looking more and more like a 5-6 year machine. I can’t think of anything that would give me upgrade. Certainly this isn’t it. This could be the longest Mac that I ever Own.

 

[eropko]

You are holding it wrong

 

[chucker23n1]

Was not the M3 expected to be a architecture step?

The M2 and M3 are both new microarchitectures.

Me too. Check out this comparison of 16" M3 Pro vs M2 Pro vs M1 Pro. Scroll down and see if there is anything, apart from more cores, etc., that is that much different between the 2021 and 2023 versions:

MacBook Pro - MacBook Pro 14-in (M4) vs MacBook Pro 14-in (M4 Pro or M4 Max) vs MacBook Pro 16-in (M4 Pro or M4 Max)

Compare the MacBook Pro 14-in (M4) with other laptops like the MacBook Pro 14-in (M4 Pro or M4 Max) and MacBook Pro 16-in (M4 Pro or M4 Max). Find the one that’s perfect for you.

www.apple.com

I didn't see anything I needed that my 16" M1 Pro doesn't already have...

That page won't tell you how the performance compares. At the same time, I really don't think most people should upgrade from M1 Pro to M3 Pro. They're only two years apart.

 

[eropko]

M1/Pro/Max will easily last 5 years, so I'll wait for M6 upgrade

 

[tipoo]

I'm actually really wondering now if the binned M3 Pro can even beat the full bin on the M2 Pro, with further cuts to cores and memory bit width. 5 P-cores is only one more than the base M3 even.

 

[vertsix]

Applesisters? How is this possible?

 

[ArkSingularity]

Everyone's workflow is different, and everyone has their own pet peeve about something that Apple should add for free. I think it's fine that there is a base level that's too small for most people, and then you decide where to upgrade. Just realise that the actual price is higher than the advertised one. Very similar to buying a car, quite rarely should you really actually get the base model. My point is, stop complaining about the value of the model that doesn't have what you need, and start focusing on the value of the model that actually does what you want. It makes a LOT more sense to complain about the price of a product you want, rather than the price of a product you don't want.

You're still talking about $1700, which is a lot of money for a 16GB/512GB configuration in the laptop market.

 

[Ethosik]

If game developers port AAA titles to Macs, then consider me a day 1 buyer of Mac Studio with M3 Max (from Mac Mini M1). I don’t mind buying a Mac for $3k because I know it’s longevity (5+ years). I do mind paying that for a PC because they just don’t last. My work laptop (Lenovo) is a testament to that - 2-3 years shelf life.

I’m all for games being on other platforms, I am an advocate of it just look at my posts. But why would you get an expensive Mac just for games?

As much as I despise Windows and how ridiculous things are on the PC side, I will never give up my 600 games on Steam now.

 

[AppleMad98004]

This is outrageous. Apple should improve raw specs with every iteration, not go backwards in terms of memory bandwidth and Neural Engine. I'd expect the number of CPU cores to increase IN ADDITION to performance and efficiency gains for each individual core.

And it's also ridiculous whenever I see them not comparing with the direct predecessor (i.e. M2). They should squarely compare M3 against M2, and this goes for A17 Pro too when they compared it against A14 instead of A16. Same with comparing against "the most popular Windows PC" etc

The won't compare it to M2 because the gains are small. Especially if you take into account memory bandwidth.

 

[mrothroc]

They are addressing people who bought M1s in 2021. This is the sensible thing, and I’m glad to see they aren’t trying to upsell people who just bought M2s a year ago. Laptops aren’t phones.

Exactly. Jumping from M1 to M2 made very little sense to the vast majority of people. If your income isn't tied to a maxed out CPU, then there was very little incentive to upgrade.

I have an M1 Max. I occasionally push it when I run k8s with a bunch of containers, but the vast majority of time it is underutilized. It meets my goals: 1) the fan never goes on and 2) it has enough memory when I need it.

Why would I get an M2? Really, at this point, why would I get an M3? We've crossed a line here where the modern machines are really overkill for most people. And, given how long Macs last, I can see that the update cycle is going to slow.

(Ok, to be totally honest, now that I'm investigating local inference with LLMs, this might change!)

 

[Ethosik]

Yeah, this is what happens when you force yourself to release something new every single year. This feels more like an M2S than an M3.

They need to keep consistent. Intel and AMD get better every year and it puts the question in the back of everyone’s mind why didn’t Apple keep Intel? Next year Intel will have something better than M3 so Apple needs an answer for it.

 

[AppleMad98004]

No one should buy the M3 Pro... M3 or M3 Max depending on your use case. The pro is a waste of money and from the die looks like a M3+ not a lower speced M3 Max which is what the M2 Pro was..... Not sure this is really a move forward but a lateral move and a marketing push.

 

[Velli]

You're still talking about $1700, which is a lot of money for a 16GB/512GB configuration in the laptop market.

Yes! But, I still argue there is a big difference between complaining about the price of a good computer, versus complaining that the computer is bad (for you).

One year after you spent the money, you forgot that you ever had them (unless you are in a financial position where you shouldn't be contemplating buying a Mac anyway). One year after you buy the wrong computer, you still have the wrong computer.

I guess I'm just tired of hearing the same old "Apple is expensive" moaning, every time they launch a product. If it wasn't worth the price, you wouldn't be moaning about the cost.

 

[Velli]

No one should buy the M3 Pro... M3 or M3 Max depending on your use case. The pro is a waste of money and from the die looks like a M3+ not a lower speced M3 Max which is what the M2 Pro was..... Not sure this is really a move forward but a lateral move and a marketing push.

How did you reach that conclusion?

 

[Velli]

Me too. Check out this comparison of 16" M3 Pro vs M2 Pro vs M1 Pro. Scroll down and see if there is anything, apart from more cores, etc., that is that much different between the 2021 and 2023 versions:

MacBook Pro - MacBook Pro 14-in (M4) vs MacBook Pro 14-in (M4 Pro or M4 Max) vs MacBook Pro 16-in (M4 Pro or M4 Max)

Compare the MacBook Pro 14-in (M4) with other laptops like the MacBook Pro 14-in (M4 Pro or M4 Max) and MacBook Pro 16-in (M4 Pro or M4 Max). Find the one that’s perfect for you.

www.apple.com

I didn't see anything I needed that my 16" M1 Pro doesn't already have...

That is a good thing.

 

[Ethosik]

Yes! But, I still argue there is a big difference between complaining about the price of a good computer, versus complaining that the computer is bad (for you).

One year after you spent the money, you forgot that you ever had them (unless you are in a financial position where you shouldn't be contemplating buying a Mac anyway). One year after you buy the wrong computer, you still have the wrong computer.

I guess I'm just tired of hearing the same old "Apple is expensive" moaning, every time they launch a product. If it wasn't worth the price, you wouldn't be moaning about the cost.

Agreed. Everything is expensive. Can we drop this constant complaints? It’s been a discussion since Apple existed.

I posted in another thread. But one of my clients purchased a batch of Lenovo laptops. $2,000 and has 8GB of RAM and 256GB SSD. This is an industry issue. Not an Apple issue.

Everything is expensive these days. I’m sitting here with a $1,600 before tax GPU for goodness sake. GPUs should not be that much.

 

[DEMinSoCAL]

Everyone's workflow is different, and everyone has their own pet peeve about something that Apple should add for free. I think it's fine that there is a base level that's too small for most people, and then you decide where to upgrade. Just realise that the actual price is higher than the advertised one. Very similar to buying a car, quite rarely should you really actually get the base model. My point is, stop complaining about the value of the model that doesn't have what you need, and start focusing on the value of the model that actually does what you want. It makes a LOT more sense to complain about the price of a product you want, rather than the price of a product you don't want.

I want a MBP14 M3 with 16GB/512GB for $1599 as Apple said they dropped the price. What they did was gimp it and introduce the gimped product at a lower price than the original product they are comparing it against.

 

[DEMinSoCAL]

That is a good thing.

For us M1 Pro owners, yes! Especially those of us that have taken advantage of some really incredible deals on 14 and 16" M1 Pro models these past few months.

 

[Lioness~]

We all know by this time what Apple want: Buy EVERY new version and trade in our perfectly 1-2 yrs old devises to them. They want to make money on us, not serving us above all.

Ah well, I'm not buying a MBP anyway, I want a new MBA, whenever that is.

 

[Velli]

I want a MBP14 M3 with 16GB/512GB for $1599 as Apple said they dropped the price. What they did was gimp it and introduce the gimped product at a lower price than the original product they are comparing it against.

No, Apple didn't say they dropped the price. They said "it now starts at 1599". They introduced a lower-spec version at a lower price, to replace a different model (the 13" with touch bar). Even with your logic, 1799 for 16/512 is still lower than the previous 1999. Like it or not, you get more for 1599,- today than you did yesterday. Maybe that's not enough for you, but the entitlement is tiring.

 

[smulji]

It seems like the architectural difference between M1, M2, and M3 is minuscule. And there is no architectural difference within the same SKU. Going from MX, to MX Pro, to MX Max, to MX Ultra is more or less about upping the core counts, and when this is not possible, they end up fusing multiple SoCs.

Nothing wrong with any of this, of course. But I would have expected more advancement on the architectural part itself. Pretty much all improvements seem linked to improvement in process technique and the possibility of adding more transistors using the same amount of space—barely any improvements to the cores themselves.

M1 to M3 is not miniscule. A large portion of the Mac user base is still on Intel-based or M1 Macs. That's who the M3-series is aimed at. Not M2 users.