Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Realityck

macrumors G4
Nov 9, 2015
10,267
15,420
Silicon Valley, CA
I know what I would do...buy a Studio M3 :)
This don't buy now, wait for the M4 is kinda a joke. Apple hasn't even demonstrated MacOS 15 but we have Gurman playing the role of Adam Osborn on just wait we have an even better processor with AI coming before the end of 2024.


The M3 Max comes with an impressive 92 billion transistors, a significant increase from the ‌M2‌ Max's 67 billion, allowing for more complex and efficient processing capabilities. The ‌M2‌ Max features eight high-performance cores and four energy-efficient cores, while the M3 Max adds an extra two or four high-performance cores. This increase in the number of high-performance cores in the M3 Max indicates a shift towards providing better raw processing power compared to previous generations that had the same number of CPU cores as the M1 Pro and ‌M2‌ Pro chips.

In terms of CPU performance, the M3 Max demonstrates notable improvements over the ‌M2‌ Max. Benchmark tests reveal that the M3 Max outperforms the ‌M2‌ Max in both single-core and multi-core tasks. Specifically, the M3 Max shows an approximately 18% increase in single-core performance compared to the ‌M2‌ Max. In multi-core performance, the improvement is even more pronounced, with the M3 Max scoring about 38% higher than the ‌M2‌ Max.

The GPU architecture of the M3 Max also sees significant enhancements. While the ‌M2‌ Max offers up to 38 GPU cores, the M3 Max pushes this even further with up to 40 cores. The M3 Max shows an increase of approximately 14% in GPU benchmarks, indicating a robust improvement over the ‌M2‌ Max. The increase in GPU cores from 38 in the ‌M2‌ Max to 40 in the M3 Max, combined with the advancements brought by the ‌3nm‌ process technology, contributes significantly to this improved performance. This enhancement in GPU performance is critical for professionals engaged in graphics-intensive tasks such as high-end video editing, 3D rendering, and complex visual effects work.

The M3 Max also benefits from the advanced features introduced in its generation, including hardware-accelerated ray tracing and mesh shading, as well as Dynamic Caching. These features contribute to more efficient and powerful graphics processing, enabling the M3 Max to deliver superior performance in real-world applications.

Another aspect where the M3 Max distinguishes itself is in unified memory quantities. While both chips offer substantial memory configuration options, the M3 Max supports up to 128GB of unified memory, 32GB more than the ‌M2‌ Max, catering to the most memory-intensive workflows.

The M3 Max represents a significant leap over the ‌M2‌ Max, marked by its superior CPU and GPU performance, higher transistor count, and increased memory support. For professionals whose work demands a very high level of computational and graphical power, the M3 Max offers a compelling upgrade, even for some existing ‌M2‌ Max users. However, for users currently equipped with the ‌M2‌ Max, the decision to upgrade will depend on the specific demands of their workflows and the value they place on the incremental improvements offered by the M3 Max.

========
One can speculate about how much better the M3 Ultra will be comparably. Maximum Ram would be increased from 192 GB to 256 GB. Offering M3 family SoC choices with the Mac mini, Mac Studio and Mac Pro can only benefit Apple consumers now rather then later.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: ruka21

mBox

macrumors 68020
Jun 26, 2002
2,361
86
Here's how an award winning film/TV composer and music editor uses the PCIe slots in his rack-mount MacPro (coming from a kluge of external PCIe expanders and trashcan MacPros). He'll be converting to Apple Silicon MacPros soon.

haha love the comments. Like he is the only Mac Pro user that has PCI cards...people are delusional :p
 
  • Love
Reactions: xbjllb

macjaffa

macrumors regular
Feb 17, 2010
144
151
Please, please, please build this bad boy in a way that lets you upgrade the SOC to newer versions so we can just keep the chassis, power supply and pci alone and just upgrade the brains every year. Otherwise all this talking about saving the planet by reducing waste is just noise. Hey, sell the SOC as a service. When a new one is available automatically ship the swappable SOC to subscribers with a postage paid return box.

For film production we always need something faster than you can deliver.
Yes and let usbout more than one soc into it. Modern day SMP
 

Boil

macrumors 68040
Oct 23, 2018
3,258
2,883
Stargate Command
One can speculate about how much better the M3 Ultra will be comparably. Maximum Ram would be increased from 192 GB to 256 GB. Offering M3 family SoC choices with the Mac mini, Mac Studio and Mac Pro can only benefit Apple consumers now rather then later.

Max RAM for a theoretical M3 Ultra should be 384GB...
 

xbjllb

macrumors 65816
Jan 4, 2008
1,373
257
The Mac Pro has become such an unbelievable dumb product. There is literally no reason to get it except to turn your nose up at the peasants and evil laugh about how much money you have... And speaking of money, anyone that thinks Apple is going to lower their prices is kidding themselves. They are squeezing every last nickel they can out of everything.
Yep, that's me exactly. And I'm buying TWO of them. Fully maxxed. You're welcome.
 

Yebubbleman

macrumors 603
May 20, 2010
5,806
2,390
Los Angeles, CA

This article comes to mind when I think about whether or not Apple will continue making a Mac Pro. The damn thing is selling more than the Mac mini and the Mac Studio combined. And that's despite it (a) never having been best in class, even when the Apples-to-Apples comparison involved Xeons on both sides, and (b) not having upgradeable GPUs or RAM anymore. Clearly people are still buying this Mac.
 
  • Love
Reactions: xbjllb

nathansz

macrumors 65816
Jul 24, 2017
1,258
1,445
Apple's laid down the law -- the one true graphics API on Apple Silicon Macs is Metal, and any other API requires a translation layer (like MoltenVK for Vulkan).

After working so hard to build that corral, I can't see them breaking it down again just for a notional set of the highest high-end users, the ones for whom a fully-jacked Studio isn't enough.

The last supported amd cards still outperform the latest apple silicon on metal
 

bearinthetown

macrumors 6502
May 5, 2018
286
323
Being happy about something is much better than being depressed, disgruntled, and negative.
Sure, but exaggerating real performance gains and saying that some product is irrelevant as something new, slightly improved appeared is sick. Also, splurging money for 10% performance increase (under full load, that is, which you almost never use) is bad for all customers (allows Apple to continue with their tricks) and for the environment.
 

th0masp

macrumors 6502a
Mar 16, 2015
832
498

This article comes to mind when I think about whether or not Apple will continue making a Mac Pro. The damn thing is selling more than the Mac mini and the Mac Studio combined. And that's despite it (a) never having been best in class, even when the Apples-to-Apples comparison involved Xeons on both sides, and (b) not having upgradeable GPUs or RAM anymore. Clearly people are still buying this Mac.
Scroll down to the comments and you'll see this:

It says here they survey 500 recent Apple hardware buyers every quarter and the reports say they are US numbers:
https://cirpapple.substack.com/about


To me seems like a bit of a tiny sample size to reach any meaningful conclusions.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Chuckeee

DaveEcc

macrumors member
Oct 17, 2022
84
113
Ottawa, ON, Canada
To me seems like a bit of a tiny sample size to reach any meaningful conclusions.
It's enough to get a rough idea, and the comments section further backs up the mix as approximately right based on other sources, like Steam hardware surveys, number of Geekbench results. I suppose it's possible that everybody got nearly the exact same but incorrect results, but it's far more likely that the results are accurate.
 

lkrupp

macrumors 68000
Jul 24, 2004
1,892
3,907
Sure, but exaggerating real performance gains and saying that some product is irrelevant as something new, slightly improved appeared is sick. Also, splurging money for 10% performance increase (under full load, that is, which you almost never use) is bad for all customers (allows Apple to continue with their tricks) and for the environment.
Not sure why you are questioning how other users spend their money. Is that any of your business? Choice?
 

MisterAndrew

macrumors 68030
Sep 15, 2015
2,881
2,363
Portland, Ore.
They should fix the huge bug that prevents card mounted SSD drives from mounting on 2019 and later Mac Pros. Total failure on Apple’s end for not fixing this major issue.
I agree. This major issue negates the biggest selling feature of the Mac Pro over the Studio.
 

Ethosik

Contributor
Oct 21, 2009
7,815
6,719
What exactly can you put in a Mac Pro's PCI slot anyway? What can it do that a Studio Ultra can't?
Thunderbolt is quite horrible for reliability on mission critical systems. I have docks, and thunderbolt 25Gb networking devices get sluggish or completely drop from my connection. Having a PCIe card eliminates these issues.

And no its not an issue with my system. There is a massive thread here for connectivity issues, and I tried on all 8 of my Macs.
 
  • Like
Reactions: xbjllb

purplerainpurplerain

macrumors 6502
Dec 4, 2022
440
768
They should cut it down to 4 PCIE slots. Nobody needs more than that now that third party GPUs are not consuming so much space.

The Apple Silicon package shouldn’t be on the main motherboard. It should be on a daughterboard.

If there are slots for two daughterboards you can upgrade the M4 to multiple multicore Apple Silicon SoCs and in the future upgrade the machine to M5, M6 etc.

Apple will provide the daughterboard upgrades. If they come out with completely new ports then we can replace the whole machine.

The Intel based 1,1 to 5,1 towers had a daughterboard design but Apple was imprisoned by whatever the x86 world was limited to.
 

purplerainpurplerain

macrumors 6502
Dec 4, 2022
440
768
They won't. Why would they not make you buy another 35 pounds of aluminum?

They are now a CPU provider. The economic incentive has changed. Like Intel and AMD they can make more money by selling CPU upgrades more frequently than system upgrades. If you can have up to two daughtercards that’s even more profitable and at the same time a metric **** ton of power for users.
 

xbjllb

macrumors 65816
Jan 4, 2008
1,373
257
They won't. Why would they not make you buy another 35 pounds of aluminum?
Because enough creative people have complained, loudly, and they don't want another trashcan Mac Pro debacle.

An expandable upgradeable Mac Pro is a virtual certainty. Given the amount of creatives still using mid-2010 Mac Pros.

They just have to figure out the most cost-effective way to do it, because very few people can afford $50,000 computers, and those that could at the end, got very very burned.
 

DavidSchaub

macrumors 6502
Jun 16, 2016
424
479
They should cut it down to 4 PCIE slots. Nobody needs more than that now that third party GPUs are not consuming so much space.

The Apple Silicon package shouldn’t be on the main motherboard. It should be on a daughterboard.

Fewer PCIe slots don’t really help anything. Those slots are the only thing that gives the Mac Pro a purpose.

I like the Mac Pro SoC package daughter board idea, but it does have tradeoffs:

- limits Apple’s design options to maintain comparability, between generations;

- might negatively impact modern PCIe speeds and comparability (the newest standards are touchy);

- would increase the cost and complexity of a machine that already costs too much.
 
  • Wow
Reactions: xbjllb

xbjllb

macrumors 65816
Jan 4, 2008
1,373
257
Fewer PCIe slots don’t really help anything. Those slots are the only thing that gives the Mac Pro a purpose.

I like the Mac Pro SoC package daughter board idea, but it does have tradeoffs:

- limits Apple’s design options to maintain comparability, between generations;

- might negatively impact modern PCIe speeds and comparability (the newest standards are touchy);

- would increase the cost and complexity of a machine that already costs too much.
Cost too much? Fully loaded it's one fifth the price of the last generation of Intel Mac Pro fully loaded.

Quit comparing a Mac Pro to the Studio which can't do PCIe.
 

DavidSchaub

macrumors 6502
Jun 16, 2016
424
479
If you can have up to two daughtercards that’s even more profitable and at the same time a metric **** ton of power for users.
I don’t think Apple will ever go back to multiple sockets. The communication between the sockets and separate memory pools is so much slower, software would have to be written to know about it, which would be a niche that almost no developer wants to deal with.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.