Apple's M7 Ultra Chip Designed to Match a 2019 Mac Pro Feat

[Boil]

This is going to be the first Mac to break the $100,000 barrier.

Pretty sure a fully kitted out IIfx could break that. Before counting inflation. Possibly a Macintosh II or IIx. Since memory cost even more.

The Macintosh IIfx sold for $10,000 - $12,000, depending on configuration, before inflation. Now with inflation... 😉

and that was for the base model with 4 MB memory, you could upgrade it to 128.

Edit: The "Dash 30fx" was much more expensive, a souped up version of IIfx, rebuilt by the company 68000. Overclocked and with a huge case. Built to order, some say it should have cost about $40.000 (unknown ram config)

LOL, mid-1990s, working a side gig as a Jack-Of-All-Trades for some friends who were shooting a very low budget movie ("Ionopsis", check it out...!); three different non-speaking roles, stage combat, too many below-the-line jobs to list; but the original job was specifying, setting up, and running a Macintosh/Media 100-based audio/video editing system; Power Mac 9500, Beta deck, Mackie mixer, Crown amp, KRK speakers, Sony broadcast monitor, RAID array (I want to say 8GB, which was HUGE for the time), DLT backup...

Anyway, that was a side-track, but one of the friends (scriptwriter, costumer, etc.) had a IIfx, of which the most demanding task was running a word processor...! I found that highly amusing...

 

[CWallace]

Kind of karmic that both the last Mac that supported 1.5TB and the next Mac that will support 1.5TB will use chips fabricated by Intel (as M7 is said to be fabricated on Intel's 18A-P improved 1.8nm node).

 

[Vincent Hanna]

That would be poetic....

 

[SlaveToSwift]

Not sure if that is missing a sarcasm emoji or not.

Mac Pro 2019 is getting upgrades in 2029? ( never mind device bought in 2022 getting support to 2032 ) Probably not. Intel support is dropped now. Security fixes likely to be few and far between. Rosetta 2 support for mainstream apps in 2029? Dead on systems still getting OS upgrades.


Meanwhile Windows 86->Arm translation support lanished for long while because was 32 bit targeted only.



P.S.

How long will the last Intel Macs be supported? macOS Sonoma gives us some hints

Nearly 20 years of data show how Intel Macs are faring as Apple switches chips.

arstechnica.com

Apple’s standard legacy/ obsolete clock is 5 + maybe 2 years after stop selling . The standard churn on most Mac models is 1 year. So that is 8 years. Then standard practice is two years of security updates. So Maybe 10 if lucky.

Are their folks who did firmware hs Kerry to “cheat” the time windows that Apple provided ? Yes. But somewhat farcical to label that “support” when the official support status is obsolete.

2013 Macs were getting security updates through 2023 and even got a certificate update this year. So at least a decade on average.

If your definition of “support” is providing new software features only available in new OS versions, that’s a silly definition. No one bought a 2013 Mac for the features of Sequoia. Apple makes zero promises to backwards port new OS features, in a large part because they often require new hardware to function effectively.

Fortunately the performance of Apple Silicon has been so spectacular from the M1 on that it’s likely that they will support new OS features for much longer than Intel Macs ever could.

 

[SlaveToSwift]

I guess you forgot the old days when certain Macs were dropped from updates over the lack of FireWire. More recent examples have some random Macs support dropped because of the year introduced (and another Mac with the same chips still getting upgrades).

M1 series' days are getting numbered too, no exception to not getting support for their latest and smartest AI in Golden Gate even if someone got the Pro/Max/Ultra versions of chips with extra cores and RAM.

What are you even talking about? You are comparing operating support to supporting extremely large future AI models?

The M1 Mac’s may not support every future AI model or new OS feature , but that doesn’t mean Apple won’t keep them secure and usable for at least a decade, if not longer.

 

[x86dude]

It’s important to have a spear head product, even if it’s a modest seller.
It builds market confidence in the rest of the Mac product range.

 

[CWallace]

It’s important to have a spear head product, even if it’s a modest seller.
It builds market confidence in the rest of the Mac product range.

That is the Mac Studio now.

Too few customers appear to need the type of internal PCIe expansion Apple Silicon allows to make it worth continuing to offer the Mac Pro.

 

[Boil]

It’s important to have a spear head product, even if it’s a modest seller.

That is the Mac Studio now.

But it could be an all-new Mac Pro Cube...!

• Debuting at WWDC 2028
• M8 Extreme - TSMC A14/1.4nm process
• 64-core CPU - 48P/16E
• 320-core GPU
• 128-core Neural Engine
• 3TB LPDDR6 RAM
• 64TB RAID - Eight 8TB NAND blades
• 1.4kW PSU
• 8" Cube

;^p

 

[mistyana]

I'm certain that the stock/normal M7 Macs will be plenty powerful and fast enough for 99,99% of users, so no need to overpay for the M7 Ultra. Like others have mentioned, the M7 Ultra Macs will probably be close to or over $100 000 fully maxed.

 

[Vincent Hanna]

The BASE M7 is going to be more than powerful enough for 99% of Apple's customers, including the large majority of professionals.

Hobbyists whining about the cost of M7 Pro/Max/Ultra machines they don't need in the first place are just indulging their bottomless sense of entitlement.