We have no such proof. Those chips have not been released. All we have are rumors.
Source?
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 Testing M3 Max Chip With 16-Core CPU and 40-Core GPU
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Have you checked what is available on the market in terms of RAM capacities and did the math required for having 36 GB on 256 bit bus?
2, 4, 6, 8, 12 and 16 GB per 64 bit LPDDR5 6400 MHz modules.
Thats why you have 8, 16, 24 GB of RAM on 128 bit M2 MacBook Air/Mac Mini. Thats why you have 16 GB and 32 GB on 256 bit M2 Pro MacBook Pro/Mac Mini. Thats why you have 32, 64 and 96 GB on 512 bit M2 Max MacBook Pro/Mac Studio.
36 GB is possible only in 192 and 384 bit configuration, with what is available on the market.
48 GB is only possible on 384 and 768 bit bus, with what is available on the market.
Considering that Apple will increase the amount of CPU cores and GPU cores in upcoming M3 series, and their architectures are heavily memory bandwidth reliant - Its very unlikely that Apple will lower the memory bus width with next generation.
I knew that Apple would increase the RAM memory bus when the rumors came out about 36 GB M3 Pro in a MacBook Pro, but 48 GB of RAM in M3 Max sealed the deal for me, considering what is available on the market. We will see 50% uplift in memory bus with M3, M3 Pro and M3 Max.
And the lineup should look like this:
M3: 6P/4E, 192 bit bus, 12 GB RAM, 12 GPU cores.
M3 Pro: 8P/8E, 384 bit bus: 24 GB RAM, 24 GPU cores.
M3 Max: 12P/4E, 768 bit bus, 48 GB RAM, 48 GPU cores.
Last edited:
No they really don’t. I can get a Windows PC for $1,500 that beats the top of the line Apple can do. The Ultra is still 2x mobile chips.
And how will that comparison fare if you would compare a computer using MOBILE chips to Apple computer using mobile chips?
Because thats what Apple uses in their computers. Mobile chips that are able to scale up.
Its a different comparison, doesn't it? Apple still does not care about high end?
No. Because when I need a fast computer, I get the fastest available at my given budget, not the fastest MOBILE available. Why would I care if the platform is mobile?
You just proved your point. Desktops shouldn’t be MOBILE based. There is no “desktop” Mac. Yet an i7 even desktop PC beats out Apple at a third of the price.
For certain workflows, the workflow itself may be the limiting factor. It may be doable on mobile, but the experience will be sub-par in comparison. May be personal preference, but I do not consider sub-par experiences high end
Last edited:
Just look up how Intel and NVIDIA outright destroys the absolute best Apple has. Blender alone is a joke.
High end does not limit to desktop.
Secondly: is it hardware fault, or software fault?
It’s hardware
To say it again, when it comes to pure performance, apple has nothing that can outperform intel/amd/nvidia
How important that is is a matter of preference, context, opinion and up for debate.
But when it comes to raw performance apple is lagging. That is just a fact
Last edited:
Yes it does. No mobile system can match Intel/AMD with NVIDIA desktop setup. No mobile system can push 1000 watts.
From a former AMD employee:
"The width of the bus does not determine how much RAM can be installed, or how much RAM can be utilized. As an aside, it does determine how the memory chips must be installed on the board (e.g. in groups of 2 or 3)."
Cannot or will not? Nothing is absolute. Nothing is stopping Apple from doing that, especially if Apple has the process node advantage.
IMHO, Apple just don’t care about that segment, likely because it doesn’t make them any money. Others can have the bragging right and probably bleed money.
That brought a smile to my face because it reminded me of the crazy Acer Predator 21X "laptop", which used dual-330 W power bricks. Not quite 1 kW, but getting up there....
Following your lead,
If we are just going to speculate,
Apple would, if they could, absolutely release a Mac Pro that was the “fastest computer available”
Just to be able to say that
instead their new Mac "pro" is a laptop cpu in a laptop soc sitting on a laptop board floating inside a very nice looking tower
Last edited:
And how does it work for Apple which uses custom packaging form factor, hmmm?
The only possibility APPLE HAS is the way they do it, which is only top side of the SOC, because of the cooling.
Therefore - for Apple, RAM capacity is determined by the bus width.
YOU are the only one who is speculating here.
PC GPU Shipments Drop 35% Year-over-Year in Q4 2022: Report
But discrete desktop graphics card sales increased in Q4 2022 over the previous quarter.www.tomshardware.com
Desktop CPU Sales Lowest in 30 Years, AMD Gains Market Share Anyway (Updated)
One rises while the rest fall.
Desktop PC shipments worldwide 2024-2028| Statista
In 2024, desktop PC shipments worldwide are forecast to amount to ***** million units.www.statista.com
Desktop is dying. Period. DIY is dying. Period. DIY is becoming only the highest end, enthusiast level of nieche. Nothing else.
Considering where upcoming SOCs are going, you will NOT need to bring your own RAM.
Maybe the RAM will be included in SOCs but not all people will go SOCs, DIY Build Yourself PC will be available forever.
Yes, it will be. As a enthusiast nieche. And thats it.
Everything else will be NUCs, Laptops, AIOs, SFF computers.
you seem very confident of your repetition of this point
what are you basing your opinion on exactly?
Can you provide any reliable, independent technical source that supports your claim?
My take is that there’s no profit there. What’s the point of offering something that burn 2000w and it’s the fastest desktop there is but losing money?
Their target customers are video workflows pros, not data scientist IMHO, so they will offer products that attracts their target customers.
What is the point of bragging rights if it doesn’t bring in the profits?
Yes and this is the issue. Essentially a $7,000 mobile system. It’s a slap in the face to pro users.
if they could produce such a machine they would charge however much it costs to make a profit
look at the price of a studio vs pro
the Mac Pro case itself can't possibly cost them 4 to 5 thousand dollars. profit margin is not an issue
my take is that they have maxed out what they can do with their laptop soc
Desktop PC is not dying. Not even close.