I bought many powermacs and Macpros in the 2000's ... when it came time to buy new ones for home and work in 2012, apple had nothing new. I was not going to spend money on a 3 year old Mac Pro and I sure as heck wasn't going to buy a glued together unexpandable iMac. I had one of those already and it was a piece of junk for work needs, mobile gpu and processor. Apple forgot the pro market . I know several print shops STILL using 2009 Mac pro's. They don't upgrade because they dont want to update their software to get on the adobe subscription bandwagon, they also don't want to spend 30,000g on a mid tier Mac Pro now that is so old. If you can't understand how insane apple prices are, I don't know what else to say. PCIe slots dont cost $30,000!!!! I can buy a pc mother board with pcie5 slots right now for $300-500... Apple are pushing glued together system because it is cheap to produce in bulk and makes them more money. Everything they manufacture is highly optimized to make $$$$. They don't care about professionals anymore... they want to make it cheap and cute and mesmerize you into buying the shine and aura. Mac computers are for basement teeny bopper musicians and YouTube/tiktok stars out to impress their friends at Starbucks now. Real people need to get multiple jobs done in a day they dont care that their laptop battery gets 16+ hours. They want a machine that blows fire out the vent ports and crunches numbers fast to get on to the next job. The power bill isn't even a factor. I moved back to PC's for my work machines back in 2012 when apple had no modern professional options available. I am not going to explain my set-up but rest assured, it was the best option and blew away anything apple offered. I am still running the same machine at a desk and I constantly swap drives and upgrade components to keep relevant. I haven't even spent close to 6g on that machine over 11 years and it is still running pro apps and getting work done. I am not buying an M machine any time soon, I don't see any need to, it's too unpredictable long term to invest in. Sealed boxes with short life spans meant to drive cycled upgrades to maximize profits. There is nothing in the best interest of the consumer for long term use of the product. Especially now if you find out you bought a crippled speed drive base machine after the return period. You are stuck with a hobbled system never able to upgrade it. just ridiculous and gross trickery from apple.
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 May Not Launch Updated Mac Studio With M2 Ultra Chip Due to Similarity With Upcoming Mac Pro
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
The Studio is not the same "form factor" as the Mini. It had to have a new case tooled. Perhaps you are thinking of "footprint"? Having the same footprint does not mean it's the same form factor.
Apple not releasing a product for 8 yrs with PCIe expansion also probably skews those numbers and conclusions too
You seem to really hate PCIe for some reason. The SoC system sucks in that you can't target your upgrade, I want more ram so I need the top chip.. even though I don't need the cpu or GPUs cores I now need to pay for. It also forces people to anticipate their system requirements years into the future and pay it all up front on day one.
The fact is another use case a Mac Pro user has is ram. The AS lineup does not currently support enough ram for pro workloads. The MS with the M1 Ultra chip tops out at 128 GB, that's not enough - certainly not when the GPU is gonna bite into that too. The MS M1 ultra chip only has a 64 core GPU best case - that's too weak and gets blown out of the water by a mid-tear AMD or Nvidia GPU. The AS lineup does not currently support enough GPU cores for pro workloads.
The M2 Ultra might in theory support 192 GB of ram - still low, and 76 cores on the GPU - still terrible. Hence why an "Extreme" M2 made sense to actually at least get into the same zip code of specs pro users would want to see - even though I don't see how Apple bolting together SoC's keeps pace with tech specifically on the GPU side. The only solution I see there is the daughterboard scenario others have suggested.
If the best Apple can muster for the AS MP is an M2 Ultra, that they by greedy choice won't stick into the mac studio - that's just 4 more Cpu cores, 12 more GPU cores, and 64 GB more ram.. than a M1 Mac Studio Ultra.. huge fail.
I think the fact of the matter is there are still a lot of Mac Pro users in the wings waiting for Apple to release something they want to buy. The MP 2019 base model was a ridiculous price for what you got and wasn't even worth getting on the treadmill with the terrible base cpu- you could pay 1/3 in windows land for more performance. I wasn't willing to drop $10K to get a usable spec.. out of the gate.
Will be interesting to see if Apple really is trying to make a workstation by frankenstiening laptop parts together, if the "extreme" chip is infact canned it sounds like that bet failed. Hopefully bolting 4 max chips together wasn't the only idea apple had to make a pro machine.
Last edited:
As early as 2 decades ago Apple & the PC OEMs noticed that consumers prefer laptops. That's why we have arrived at a 80/20 ratio today.
The most impacted is the PC workstation desktop market. Demand for such a computer isn't at the percent of all units shipped to 195 countries what it was 2 decades ago.
My AirPods has more raw performance than a Power PC G4.
They offset this by either increasing margins, lowering cost or delaying refresh. Hence we have the frozen in time 3yo 2019 Mac Pro, 4yo 2013 Mac Pro and the 3yo iMac Pro. As Apple said macOS devices get replaced every 4 years then the 2019 model should get a refresh by December.
As early as 2017 iPhone and Android chips were fast enough to bench as well as a 2017 MBP 13"
Intel chips were 14nm & iPhone chips were 10nm. Too lazy to check the node of the Android phones.
Just a rumour at this point and Apple did point out to one more machine to upgrade to AppleSilicon but at this point it seems like Apple is doing the following:
M/M Pro = MacMini
M Max/M Ultra = MacStudio
M Ultra/M Extreme = MacPro
M = MBA
M Pro/M Max = MBP
M = iMac 24”
M Pro/M Max = iMac Pro (a hunch)
Last edited:
Possible. Don’t think a new Mac Studio will be released in the near future.
I wouldnt think so. Apple could do surveys direct to key accounts that actually bought Mac Pros. They could also covertly get data direct from macOS to see if the PCIe expansion slots changed within a specific time frame.Apple not releasing a product for 8 yrs with PCIe expansion also probably skews those numbers and conclusions too
You seem to really hate PCIe for some reason. The SoC system sucks in that you can't target your upgrade, I want more ram so I need the top chip.. even though I don't need the cpu or GPUs cores I now need to pay for. It also forces people to anticipate their system requirements years into the future and pay it all up front on day one.
The fact is another use case a Mac Pro user has is ram. The AS lineup does not currently support enough ram for pro workloads. The MS with the M1 Ultra chip tops out at 128 GB, that's not enough - certainly not when the GPU is gonna bite into that too. The MS M1 ultra chip only has a 64 core GPU best case - that's too weak and gets blown out of the water by a mid-tear AMD or Nvidia GPU. The AS lineup does not currently support GPU cores for pro workloads.
The M2 Ultra might in theory support 192 GB of ram - still low, and 76 cores on the GPU - still terrible. Hence why an "Extreme" M2 made sense to actually at least get into the same zip code of specs pro users would want to see - even though I don't see how Apple bolting together SoC's keeps pace with tech specifically on the GPU side. The only solution I see there is the daughterboard scenario others have suggested.
If the best Apple can muster for the AS MP is an M2 Ultra, that they by greedy choice won't stick into the mac studio - that's just 4 more Cpu cores, 12 more GPU cores, and 64 GB more ram.. than a M1 Mac Studio Ultra.. huge fail.
That marketing info is very valuable as to what direction R&D money goes forward.
I do not have anything against PCIe expansion slots. I am pointing out into a possible echo chamber the myriad of possible indicators as to why Apple keeps pushing Pro desktops without it. It is simple user demand for it.
They did have data from 2006-2012 Mac Pros with PCIe expansion slots to base design money direction.
Although I disagree with Apple's decision though. What would have been better would be Apple continuing the 2006-2012 Mac Pro enclosure to this day and update the Xeon chips when new ones were made available then start the Mac Studio in 2013 instead rather than in 2022.
I'd wager Apple noticed Mac Pro users who never added/modified their PCIe expansion slot and just bought it for the raw performance.
Hence
- 2013 Mac Pro
- 2017 iMac Pro
- 2022 Mac Studio
- 2023 Mac mini M2 Pro
AS lineup caters to >80% of known and future use cases. The fringe workflow that does not make any economic sense for Apple to support is excluded as the units produced would probably stay in inventory far longer than Apple sees profitable.
Many here speculated that the $556 2022 iPad Pro 12.9" M2 WiFi 128GB that was sold by Tiger Direct is an indication of that SKU not moving and needs to be liquidated within 24 hours. Take a cut loss and move forward.
I do agree... Apple should do better at current MSRP of all Mac SKUs by doubling the RAM & SSD that such as
| Mac model | MSRP | Chip | RAM (GB) | SSD (TB) | CPU (Core) | GPU (Core) |
| Mac Studio** | $3,999 | M2 Ultra | 128 | 2 | 24 | 60 |
| Mac Studio | $3,999 | M1 Ultra | 128 | 2 | 20 | 48 |
| MBP 16" | $3,499 | M2 Max | 64 | 2 | 12 | 38 |
| Mac Studio** | $1,999 | M2 Max | 64 | 1 | 12 | 30 |
| MBP 14" | $3,099 | M2 Max | 64 | 2 | 12 | 30 |
| Mac Studio | $1,999 | M1 Max | 64 | 1 | 10 | 24 |
| MBP 14" | $2,499 | M2 Pro | 32 | 2 | 12 | 19 |
| MBP 16" | $2,699 | M2 Pro | 32 | 2 | 12 | 19 |
| MBP 16" | $2,499 | M2 Pro | 32 | 1 | 12 | 19 |
| Mac mini | $1,299 | M2 Pro | 32 | 1 | 10 | 16 |
| MBP 14" | $1,999 | M2 Pro | 32 | 1 | 10 | 16 |
| Mac mini | $799 | M2 | 16 | 1 | 8 | 10 |
| Mac mini | $599 | M2 | 16 | 0.5 | 8 | 10 |
| MBA | $1,499 | M2 | 16 | 1 | 8 | 10 |
| MBP 13" | $1,499 | M2 | 16 | 1 | 8 | 10 |
| MBP 13" | $1,299 | M2 | 16 | 0.5 | 8 | 10 |
| iMac 24" | $1,699 | M1 | 16 | 1 | 8 | 8 |
| iMac 24" | $1,499 | M1 | 16 | 0.5 | 8 | 8 |
| MBA | $1,199 | M2 | 16 | 0.5 | 8 | 8 |
| iMac 24" | $1,299 | M1 | 16 | 0.5 | 8 | 7 |
| MBA | $999 | M1 | 16 | 0.5 | 8 | 7 |
| MB 12"*** | $699 | A16 Bionic | 8 | 256GB | 6 | 5 |
| Mac nano*** | $299 | A16 Bionic | 8 | 256GB | 6 | 5 |
**My expected 2023 Mac Studio base SKUs
***My expectation what a A16 Bionic-based macOS device would cost and their RAM & SSD at these MSRPs.
I read through your Mac Studio-thick paragraph and have to ask.
Have you considered that other users with identical/similar workflow in the past changed or are not active anymore?
I know of some newspapers who has not changed their Macs since 2005 because of QuarkXPress. It's already perfect as is for their use case that remained static. They love their workflow so much that they actively buy used same SKU Mac Pros that they have right now as spares.
But then again newspaper companies have been closing down left and right because no one's buying their printed copies anymore. Neither are companies putting ads.
Apple, Intel and even Microsoft provided explicit and implicit replacement cycles
- per Apple it's 4 years
- per Intel it's 5-6 years
- per macOS/Windows it's ~10 years
I made the error of buying 2019 MBP 16" Core i7 14nm because I wanted to continue using Apple Aperture that had its final release in 2014. I refused to change. I also assumed Apple Silicon will be identical to the PPC to Intel transition in 2006. Performance improvement would be <20%.
Boy was I wrong. Makes me wish I never bought a new Mac since as late as 2015.
I personally prefer a Software as a Service subscription model that Adobe/Microsoft push as many business are very specific about cash flow and hate to indulge on large 1 time perpetual license fee.
Professional market has change. Some prefer what they are familiar with out of habit.
Lack of PCIe expansion slots in Pro desktops in the last decade are an indicator that people replacing or buying for the 1st time are unwilling to pay for it.
Only a <50% minority do.
Product refresh is reflective of this.
Next iPhone will be on a 3nm chip. Imagine the raw performance of a M / Pro / Ultra /Extreme on that new node.
I still have Firewire HDD & cameras on hand. Does not mean I'd actively demand for a Mac with Apple Silicon to have that port. It's been kaput since 2008 when the 1st dSLR that can record 720p and 108p only offloaded video via CompactFlash cards.
Last edited:
I feel all Mac products should start with a base 1TB SSD and the base RAM at 12GB as it’s shared with the GPU, 16GB would be nice but that’s will be a miracle if Apple decides as much.
iPhones have a good storage starting point at 128GB for the non-Pro models sans SE, the Pro models should start at 256GB as some of the recorded formats require it as minimum. Same for iPads 256GB base for Pro lineup.
there was a Mac studio ~20 years ago, the g4 cube. it flopped and disappeared. Don’t get me wrong, 20 years later it’s cool in a retro novelty sort of way, kinda like a TAM. The reality is and will always be that desktops by and large aren’t space constrained, so the vast majority of power user will prefer something larger and more capable to something smaller and more expensive, the role laptops usually fill. whatever apple brands it, a Mac isn’t a Mac Pro unless You can swap in your own ram, storage, graphics and other expansion for specific use cases.
It looks more and more likely they’re going to release the second generation Mac studio as a “Mac Pro” and finally give up on the workstation adjacent market they haven’t really taken seriously since the MacPro 4,1 in 2009.
I recently purchased Microsoft Office 2021 one time for 80% off which is cheaper compared to Microsoft 365. If I need to use it on my iPad I remote into my Mac. Once again cheaper and even if a new version is released every 3 years the product is supported for at least 5 years since release if not longer, at this point Office has been a matured product for many years. I also have Affinity v2 UL as I dislike subs unless it makes sense relating to a specific utility perspective.
The Power Mac G4 Cube did not provide parity raw performance to a Power Mac G4 Tower. Mac Studio goes beyond parity.
It was a pioneer that helped push SFF PCs.
People were still with the concept of "I need PCI expansion slots" in year 2000.
But then I/O back then were quickly changing.
As each node shrink comes to market the % of units of computers shipped as workstation desktops diminishes because other form factors can do the work in a more convenient package.
But I do agree with you. There will always be someone who wants a tower computer but the makers have to wonder will they sell enough at a certain buyer-acceptable margin to make it worth while to spend any R&D money further?
Netbooks were a hot thing in the mid 00s but largely replaced by tablets at their price points as it was a better product.
Is that the version that sells legitimate serial keys from some weird looking 3rd party website?
whoops, yeah that's the one. But you can imagine someone took a mac mini and just extruded it up to fit an enormous heatsink.
Made it a single floor bungalow into a near 3 story home.whoops, yeah that's the one. But you can imagine someone took a mac mini and just extruded it up to fit an enormous heatsink.
Half the height is dedicated to a beefy HSF.
“…work out a better strategy for the machine's positioning going forward.”
You’re telling me Apple hasn’t already thought about its strategy before releasing new products?!
🤦♂️
This rumor is bogus.
You’re telling me Apple hasn’t already thought about its strategy before releasing new products?!
🤦♂️
This rumor is bogus.
having a pcie slot to add a card for firewire should be an option in any pro machine. professionals have hardware needs to swap and add. look at that music studio video the guy posted above. anyhow.. apple doesn't make professional PC's any more. they make glued together, highly production optimized profit machines with forced initial buy upgrades. I have swapped my video card 3 times in 10 years. Apple stopped supporting Nvidia cards and now I am stuck using a 6900XT which is NOT the best option available for 3D rendering in Redshift, but it is the the only option apple supports.
The M series do not provide the best option for some of the work I do.There is the xMac Studio Thunderbolt chassis from Sonnet, that’s basically what you’re imagining. Although it just uses regular Thunderbolt, sounds like you’re wishing for more like full bandwidth PCIe 4.0 x16.
There’s also the OWC ThunderBay Flex 8, that’s PCIe slots plus HDD bays. I haven’t seriously considered either, as the price/performance doesn’t seem worth it for me, but I’d be curious to hear from anyone who’s tried them!
Thunderbolt 5 80Gbps I/O would address the 40Gbps cap.
The price of the item may be padded in light of its demand. As Apple has demonstrated >50% of their Pro desktop users have no requirement for PCIe expansion slots.
Last edited:
Doesn;t the MacMini almost make the studio obsolete? It's like the iMac Pro before that got superseded by M1.
Raw performance-wise many claim that the 2023 Mac mini M2 Pro is at the level of a 2022 Mac Studio M1 Max.
Hence the need for a 2023 Mac Studio M2 Max/Ultra by June.
Every PowerMac and Mac Pro I own is limited by too few expansion slots. I have to pick and choose which cards to use. they didn’t start that way, but as they got older, I could keep them running and up to date with quick, affordable additions. that’s the great thing with expansion, it keeps a machine working for years to come. When the 2009 Mac Pro launched, Apple claimed it supported 32GB of RAM in a dual CPU model. Turns out years later that you can bump one up to 128GB for basically pennies buying used server RAM. when you add in support for even some of the latest GPUs with 16GB of VRAM, that more onboard memory than any Apple Silicon Mac so far! Not really a far comparison, but it shows the power of expandability and why it’s valuable. buying a computer that can be expanded is about investing in a tool that will be able to serve you or its next owner for the long haul rather than buying a device that’s essentially disposable. Apple wants us to pay for the maxed out version now and again in ~5 years, I want to buy a tool that came be used at a high level for decades. There’s next to no chance we ever see an expandable Mac Pro again, but if we do, I promise those slots are getting used and those machines will truck on for so much longer than their locked down counterparts.
Literally scaling an embedded chip design through cellphones, laptops, desktop computers and into servers/workstations.
The current design just not flexible enough; you have to double up the entire chip to support just one of - more CPU, more GPU, more RAM.
This is also further limited by (at least previous) chips not having sufficient PCIe support for discrete GPU or eGPU.
It is mostly modularity. The CPU is pretty rocking, but GPU and memory can currently only scale by doubling CPU power. You don't need a massive Mac Pro case if you aren't going to support PCIe cards or support memory expansion beyond what is soldered on the SoC from the factory.
the M1 and M2 line are nearly the ideal chips if Apple was to recreate the trash can Mac Pro - which is effectively what the Mac Studio is, in a different form factor.
My iMac is turning 10 in a week's time. I had no need for a PCIe expansion slot.
Use case has not meaningfully change since 2015.
I want a replacement because it's been more than half a year since its final Security Update of 2019 macOS Catalina. Preventive maintenance is also a concern.
>50% of Mac Pro users/buyers do not need/want it either.
At the time of declaration Apple may have not had an actual RAM part that exceed 32GB to actually test with the 2009 Mac Pro.
I have a 2010 MBP 13" & 2011 MBP 13" that Apple claims is limited to 8GB RAM. At the time anything over that wasn't available. A year later users were now able to buy 16GB RAM and then test it on my laptop. IIRC the price of 16GB RAM was really high and not worth it until much much much later.
When I ordered this iMac I immediately bought 32GB RAM so on day 1 I would be on maxed out RAM.
I appreciate wanting to have user upgradeable RAM & SSD. I see 8TB SATA SSD going for under $660 and I swoon. As a data drive I do not need >500MB/s. 2TB NVMe M.2 SSD with throughput ~7GB/s...
I wish it were possible to have an all-SSD Fusion Drive with
- 2TB NVMe M.2 SSD ~7GB/s
- 8TB SATA SSD ~500MB/s
macOS moving most frequently used files to the NVMe and the least freuqently files onto the SATA.
Because of that I was eyeing AMD Zen 3-based SFF PCs that have spare 2.5" SATA bays and NVMe M.2 slots.
It's 2023 already they discovered that you want to squeeze more performance out of a computer you need put RAM onto the SoC package.
NAND memory onto a logic board is plain greedy. lol. I'd pay an extra $100 per vacant NVMe M.2 slots
Replacement cycles
- Per the 1990s and GAAP: 3 years
- Per Apple: 4 years
- Per Intel: 5-6 years
- Per after final Security Update: 10 years
Last edited: