Apple May Not Launch Updated Mac Studio With M2 Ultra Chip Due to Similarity With Upcoming Mac Pro

[sam_dean]

4 years from now after numerous continuous years of Apple NOT shipping a discrete GPU, there will still be folks saying that Apple’s going to do it “any day now” and “there’s no reason why they can’t”. Which, ok, technically… true?

Apple changed that thinking in the chip industry.

They made a dGPU into a iGPU. Check the M1 Ultra that has a similar iGPU performance of a RTX 3090.

In Nov 2020 when the M1 came out its iGPU was ranked the highest performing one of any desktop/laptop chip, SoC or APU.

 

[Unregistered 4U]

Behind my 2019 Mac Pro! And they have to at least beat that, right?

Not necessarily, especially if you’re using an application that has been coded, and tweaked for, Intel processors for years and years. And, potentially, has a GPU pipeline that assumes IMR and not TBDR (trying to fit an IMR into TBDR is bound to lead to performance issues).

So, while the potential is there, the software’s going to have to catch up. It really depends on what you’re doing though. If you’re running Intel based benchmarks, no, Apple Silicon doesn’t have to beat that. If you’re running Final Cut Pro, where the vendor was focused on being as performant as possible on Apple Silicon, then yeah, there would be a big difference.

 

[Unregistered 4U]

Nothing that apple produces will equal the performance of a dedicated GPU. The M1/2 chips aren't even close to a high-end discrete GPU card.

For those developers that understand how to utilize the architecture properly, they’re seeing workflows that aren’t just some percentage faster than Intel/AMD, they’re not even possible on those systems. A programmer referenced what he was doing in one of these threads and I modified my statement that, if one don’t need macOS AND/OR aren’t running one of the workflows that are impossible on any other platform, then a user should be looking at a PC if peak performance is their main requirement.

The M1/2 chips aren’t close to a high-end discrete IMR GPU card mainly if they’re expected to run code designed for high-end discrete IMR GPU cards. That will likely always be true. Tailor the coding to the rendering and a developer will see a difference.

 

[Unregistered 4U]

Apple needs to have a stark differentiator between their products and those based on Intel/AMD or else there is no justification for the price premium.

They do. They run macOS. For anyone that DOESN’T need macOS, there’s “literally everything else”. There are a LOT of folks that don’t feel that price premium to run macOS is worth it. I mean, possibly millions of millions of folks that don’t feel that price premium is worth it.

Luckily, Apple only needs somewhere over 20 million folks in the world that DO feel it’s worth it in order to make it profitable enough to continue making Macs. Apple’s never ever trying to “win the world”, they’re just trying to “win a profitable chunk.”

 

[sam_dean]

They do. They run macOS. For anyone that DOESN’T need macOS, there’s “literally everything else”. There are a LOT of folks that don’t feel that price premium to run macOS is worth it. I mean, possibly millions of millions of folks that don’t feel that price premium is worth it.

Luckily, Apple only needs somewhere over 20 million folks in the world that DO feel it’s worth it in order to make it profitable enough to continue making Macs. Apple’s never ever trying to “win the world”, they’re just trying to “win a profitable chunk.”

You're speaking from a current user point of view.

I am speaking of marketing to future customers.

That over 27 million units shipped annually are aging.

They need to replace them when they permanently stop buying.

It is like old Star Trek fans having a cow over Star Trek Discovery. Simply put they need to appeal to a new audience because the old fans are slowly dying out.

 

[code-m]

I'm not looking. I am pointing out that those cheap perpetual licenses are mis licensed from bulk corp/org licenses.

I talked to a MS country manager about that and they confirmed its a mislicensing.

Oddly enough if that is the case I have registered it on the official Microsoft website and it does not show or reflect a bulk Corp/org license, but whatever pacifies you at night to hold on to your beliefs. 😉

 

[Unregistered 4U]

You could look up term. You could also allow for there to be more nuance to things than merely “all or nothing”.

Edit: You’re also missing the core point: companies won’t produce what people want. Companies produce what they want people to buy.

This has never not been the case, though. There’s nothing more special about Apple not making a specific computer than there is a company in the 1920’s that makes milk buckets only making the sizes THEY want people to buy. All companies, and individuals for that matter, producing products that they want others to buy… by default… are producing what they want people to buy.

I’m not sure it’s worth my time to try to explain the nuance here, especially when this has all been discussed on this forum before by multiple people.

It’s likely not. I mean starting with the premise that “everyone buying things today do not want what’s being offered, but, and this is important, they’re buying it anyway” is kinda starting from a shaky foundation. Are there some people that don’t want the products that are being offered? Yes. Are they, maybe, unhappy about that? Sure. Can they describe their feeling as being the result of hypercapitalism? Sure, I’m fine with that.

 

[Unregistered 4U]

This is hilarious. Apple is a for profit company with a duty to shareholders to make as much profit as possible. They don’t give a crap what we want as long as we buy what they sell.

Yes, and they do this by selling millions of laptops and other mobile systems. And, smart companies talk to their customers if they’re getting ready to make a very niche product (the same way Apple did before they introduced the current Mac Pro), to ensure that the sales expectations could match the targets so that they will see an acceptable ROI. They absolutely don’t give a crap about what millions of folks think about the Mac Pro, as they likely never expect to even sell a million systems in over the entire time that it’s on sale. 7 million people could sign a petition right now stating they will never buy another Mac Pro, but if Apple can confirm a million sales over the next 5-6 years, it wouldn’t matter.

 

[Unregistered 4U]

I always find it interesting that when someone says they want Apple to go back to their roots, they almost NEVER mean the Apple II. Not THOSE roots, the roots AFTER those, those roots don’t count.

 

[NT1440]

He means add DDR5 controllers on the die, and allow the system to address both the on package LPDDR and the DDR dimms. Basically having like up to 200GB/s swap with up to a few terabytes of DDR5, or up to like 256GB or “highest level cache” that runs at like 800GB/s or more, depending on how you look at it.

Not a complicated concept.

You don’t see how operating two different memory sets and timings makes for a ludicrously complex process when we’re talking about data sizes that Pro’s need in RAM?

Who’s in charge of where that data is stored? Apple? If yes, does that mean adherence to a certain memory related API? What happens if you don’t follow?

If it’s up to the developer, you don’t see how navigating different timing operations to account for the drastically different speeds to fetch that data?


You don’t see how complex the idea of just slapping some much slower RAM and managing the different characteristic ends up being? Should the OS handle it? Should a dedicated new memory controller handle it? Should assignments be completely up to the dev? If it is, what rules are in place when limits are overstepped? What does that mean for stability? Do we have to teach devs how to handle this new memory paradigm that only exists in this tier of hardware? So they now have to program with this in mind, or will most ignore it and have end users complain that there’s no real uplift when going Mac Pro because the dev couldn’t be bothered to deal with this one exception in the hardware lineup?

 

[Unregistered 4U]

That over 27 million units shipped annually are aging.

Half of those are going to folks that have never owned a Mac (or possibly any computer) before. Meaning there’s over 10 million folks that chose it over the other options. For those that have been using macOS for years and years, it’s what they’re familiar with. So much so that, like air, they may come to think it doesn’t have a lot of value. But, it’s one of the biggest differences between what Apple’s selling and what everyone else is selling and there’s no company (that wants to stay in business ) that will ever be able to say they can offer a macOS native system.

 

[NT1440]

You're speaking from a current user point of view.

I am speaking of marketing to future customers.

That over 27 million units shipped annually are aging.

They need to replace them when they permanently stop buying.

It is like old Star Trek fans having a cow over Star Trek Discovery. Simply put they need to appeal to a new audience because the old fans are slowly dying out.

Every earnings call for the last decade plus they make a point of calling out what percentage of Mac purchasers are new to the platform. Perhaps you may want to look into those numbers.

 

[sam_dean]

Every earnings call for the last decade plus they make a point of calling out what percentage of Mac purchasers are new to the platform. Perhaps you may want to look into those numbers.

That reply is in reference to the person's original premise.

Look back in time enough and you'll understand the framing of that reply.

 

[Stevenyo]

You don’t see how operating two different memory sets and timings makes for a ludicrously complex process when we’re talking about data sizes that Pro’s need in RAM?

Who’s in charge of where that data is stored? Apple? If yes, does that mean adherence to a certain memory related API? What happens if you don’t follow?

If it’s up to the developer, you don’t see how navigating different timing operations to account for the drastically different speeds to fetch that data?


You don’t see how complex the idea of just slapping some much slower RAM and managing the different characteristic ends up being? Should the OS handle it? Should a dedicated new memory controller handle it? Should assignments be completely up to the dev? If it is, what rules are in place when limits are overstepped? What does that mean for stability? Do we have to teach devs how to handle this new memory paradigm that only exists in this tier of hardware? So they now have to program with this in mind, or will most ignore it and have end users complain that there’s no real uplift when going Mac Pro because the dev couldn’t be bothered to deal with this one exception in the hardware lineup?

It's literally not more complicated than using swap or having multiple levels of cache, things that have been around for 30+ years in consumer tech. Why do you want to assume everything is so difficult? There's no need. Either treat the LPDDR as a huge cache or the DDR as super fast swap, done.

 

[Stevenyo]

I always find it interesting that when someone says they want Apple to go back to their roots, they almost NEVER mean the Apple II. Not THOSE roots, the roots AFTER those, those roots don’t count.

Honestly, I would put money Apple's computers being better today if the IIgs was where development shifted rather than the Mac II and beyond.

 

[Stevenyo]

Yes, and they do this by selling millions of laptops and other mobile systems. And, smart companies talk to their customers if they’re getting ready to make a very niche product (the same way Apple did before they introduced the current Mac Pro), to ensure that the sales expectations could match the targets so that they will see an acceptable ROI. They absolutely don’t give a crap about what millions of folks think about the Mac Pro, as they likely never expect to even sell a million systems in over the entire time that it’s on sale. 7 million people could sign a petition right now stating they will never buy another Mac Pro, but if Apple can confirm a million sales over the next 5-6 years, it wouldn’t matter.

What are you even arguing at this point? We all agree apple is a mobile device maker. No one is saying they won't buy a mac pro, we're all saying apple won't make one. I seriously don't understand what you think your point is?

 

[Detnator]

Lol, of course the sales are slow it costs $20,000-50,000! plus the wheels for the case are extra! Lol. What a joke. Powermac's used to be around 4-5g for a decent mid-tier entry point. They ruined their product category. They had a chance to gain larger market share being compatible with Intel devices, and they blew it.

Failed and unpredictable Mac Pro launches and redesigns. No professional business could depend on Apple's unpredictable hardware releases. Hardware vendors aren't going to waste their time making an expansion card for trashcan that took 6 years to come out and people complained about. They forbid Nvidia devices on their pro machines. No hardware vendor it going to waste their time writing drivers that only apple can approve. They want people buying hubs and dongles to add more ports. It makes more money!

Now they are on a proprietary processor with no true compatibility with Intel and you think making a pro machine makes any sense when software developers are most likely going to start backing out supporting mac's again (just like the 90's)? They ripped out every standard for graphics and are pushing their own iOS centric metal platform. They provide no Nvidia compatibility for expanding GPU. It's a clear done deal on the pro market. They will ride the Final Cut Pro and Logic wave till the company eventually can't compete anymore. People will realize what a huge waste of money it is to buy their machines with the limited software and hardware support.

Another ranting load of crock (ie. inaccuracies) from you bashing Apple (on an Apple based forum to boot) all with no substance.

I asked you before and you didn’t answer… I ask you again: why are you here?

 

[AdamJD]

I feel you. I have M1 Mac Mini, and I have wanted to upgrade to Mac Studio ever since it was released

Wellllll...I'm on board with almost you're entire reply. 😂 If I were on an M1 Mac mini, I'd be happily watching and waiting. As it is, I'm on a 2014 MBP. You're driving the Mach 5 and I'm riding in Tow Mater. I've done more than my share of waiting.

...I want Mac Studio with an M2 Max chip (or give me a 27" iMac with M2 Max and I will be even happier). Like you said now Mac Studio and Mac Mini with M2 Pro are priced in such a weird manner that I don't know what to think... So the best option for me is to wait.

Anyway, I'm really hoping Apple will release Mac Studio with M2 Max in March since that would be a smart move. Get the last batch of old 5mm chips out before 3mm chips come in. However, knowing Apple they might not do that and just keep it stuck in the M1 tier who knows for how long.

I'd prefer the Mac Studio with an M2 Max chip over the 27" iMac, but that screen would have me looking!

I do think a lot of people who upgraded the M2 Mac mini pro will be a bit disappointed if a base model M2 Max Mac Studio comes in with the same price at the M1.

 

[Detnator]

Behind what? An Nvidia based system? What are you doing, Nvidia workloads tuned for Nvidia GPU’s?

Nothing Apple produces will ever be better at Nvidia than Nvidia.

Indeed. Absolutely right.

In fact nothing anyone produces will ever be better at Nvidia than Nvidia.

And Apple isn’t trying to be good at Nvidia. Apple is trying to be good at Apple - certain specific workflows and processes.

Yet some people here keep going on about how Apple’s GPUs can’t compete against Nvidia. It’s almost comical.

They don’t understand Apple. Apple doesn’t give two hoots about Nvidia and has no desire to compete with them.

Apple provides tools to do certain tasks. At those tasks Apple excels, better than anyone else. And for those that need to accomplish those tasks, Apple is by far the best choice.

To those who want to do something else (eg. Nvidia optimized stuff, or AAA games, or what have you) then buy the right tool for that job and stop bashing Apple for not competing in those spaces.

If you need to toast bread, don’t complain the fridge can’t do it. Just buy a damn toaster.

 

[AdamJD]

Apple provides tools to do certain tasks. At those tasks Apple excels, better than anyone else. And for those that need to accomplish those tasks, Apple is by far the best choice.

To those who want to do something else (eg. Nvidia optimized stuff, or AAA games, or what have you) then buy the right tool for that job and stop bashing Apple for not competing in those spaces.

👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻

I get a Mac to get 💩 done...productivity...work output. The new Macs are beautifully build, efficient tools that help make getting my work done a pleasure.

I'm thrilled that I can ALSO fully emulate GameCube Rogue Squadron II, Star Wars Bounty Hunter, Goldeneye and arcade games from the 80s/90s 10x resolution and 60FPS. Guess what I'd be playing the top Nvidia card in a Mac! 😂

 

[cocoua]

Well, lets see the price and specs for the base Mac Pro, before to say that this is the worst rumor/news ever in Mac hardware.

Mac Studio is the retina Macbook Pro 15” 2012 of the desktop computers. It wont be nothing compared in the days to come, the balance between size, performance and noise is outstanding.

 

[sam_dean]

Those wondering why Apple would even consider this may want to check this thread out.

https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/more-evidence-that-apple-plans-to-update-apple-silicon-yearly.2379887/

I see it as having a lot of merit if you look at it from a supply chain point of view and getting all SoC on the same tech generation and process node within 11-13 months.

 

[DeepIn2U]

If that’s the case Apple should be releasing an updated iMac 🖥️.

I’m expecting a 27”/31” iMac with M2/M2 Pro with 72GB RAM.

That would kick the llamas butt!

 

[duck apple]

... seem to suggest Apple backed itself into a corner, essentially realizing the Studio is as good as it’s going to get with Apple Silicon.

It's far from good enough.

1. Professional users need two HDMI 2.1 ports or one HDMI 2.1 and one Display Port 1.4.
2. Storage expansion.
   It needs one or two NVMe slot (tray/bay designed by Apple to accomodate user replaceable NVMe blade), each with 4 PCIe gen. 4 or 5 lanes.
   The current provision of Thunderbolt connection to (expensive) external Thunderbolt NVMe enclosure is a performance looser (besides compatibility issue) comparing to embedded NVMe slots on motherboard of PC.
   
   
3. Replacing SD card slot with dual mode CF Express slot that also accepts SD card.
   Most higher end mirrorless cameras has been moved to fast CF Express card for good.
4. Those two USB-A 3.1 ports should be downgraded to USB-A 2 (480 Mb/s).
   They are meant for wired keyboard and mouse; the x2 10Gb bandwidth could be better utilized, such as providing the mentioned Mini Display port 1.4.
5. Move most USB and Thunderbolt ports to the front side and more distantly spaced to each other for easy access.
   Because the height of body, the position of these back side ports makes it a real pain to access. It's always dreadful to me when plugging or unplugging device from these tightly spaced ports (a light tapping of neighboring cable to external SSD could disconnect the disk since USB-4/Thunderbolt connector is so loose).
6. Give us one or two 8-lanes hot pluggable PCIe gen. 4 or 5 ports.
   Hot pluggable PCIe host port for connecting to PCIe switch with hundred of PCIe lanes expansion is now very matured and reliable on Linux PC.
   
   For Mac's A/V production segment, connecting to a PCIe switch based enclosure accommodating 6 bays of NVMe blade or 2.5" SSD with a single cable will be sold as hot cake .
   
   I can accept that this is exclusive for MacPro (in form factor similar to the tower-shaped AirPort Extreme scaled up, without wasted hollow for PCIe slots and disk bays.
7. Front LED breathing in sleep mode, please!

Of cause, Apple won't realize any of the above.😔

And the followings are for the future generation of M:

1. Increasing RAM capacity
   This is the Achilles heel of M1, and no substantial progress in M2.
2. Decoupling RAM capacity with CPU/GPU core count
   Many peoples want 128GB or even 256 GB RAM without more than 20 CPU cores and/or 48 GPU cores.
3. Decoupling GPU core count with CPU core count
   For the similar reason as the above point.

 

[duck apple]

I’m expecting a 27”/31” iMac with M2/M2 Pro with 72GB RAM.

That would kick the llamas butt!

I'm dreaming for a 32" iMac with 6K Mini LED panel.
How could it be so difficult to realize?