Gurman: No New Mac Studio and Mac Pro Until Mid-2025

[BrightDarkSky]

Makes me happy for my M3 Max MBP. Mac Studio power in a portable package.

my m1 Max does everything I needed to do. no upgrading for me probably ever LOL

I'm not paying another $3,000 or so and then get basically the same machine that does exactly the same things and I just saved 10 seconds of rendering.

lol nope

 

[monoduster]

The M2 Max Studio is a bad purchase now

not because there's a better chip coming—there's always a better chip coming

but because Apple only supports their computers for a given number of years from when they were first released so you're paying full price but getting one less year of updates. And the value will only get worse the longer they keep selling it.

 

[ric22]

I guess it depends upon whether you're talking about unit sales vs revenue. However Mac Pro sales are not insignificant.

MacBook Pro and MacBook Air overwhelmingly drive Apple Mac sales

New research claims to have details on exactly how dominant MacBook Pro and MacBook Air sales are, versus desktop contemporaries.

appleinsider.com

I wonder if those estimates- which is all they are- are based on unit sales or revenue? It's hard/impossible to see the MacPro outselling the Mac Mini 3 to 1!!! 1% of all Mac sales to the Mac Mini only, and outsold by Studio and Pro? Hmmmm. 🧐

 

[Unregistered 4U]

I'd be shocked if the MacPro made up even 1% of Mac sales... maybe just during the month it launched? I'd have guessed under 0.1% 😅

You know, all they said was single digit, they didn’t say which side of the decimal point that digit was on! LOL

 

[ric22]

Dude, Apple has a mouse that you have to flip over to charge and you’re going to try to say everything they do makes sense? 🤣🤣🤣

That thing is such an un-ergonomic piece of crap to use, which is a bigger problem than the idiotic charging set up!

 

[EugW]

I wonder if those estimates- which is all they are- are based on unit sales or revenue? It's hard/impossible to see the MacPro outselling the Mac Mini 3 to 1!!! 1% of all Mac sales to the Mac Mini only, and outsold by Studio and Pro? Hmmmm. 🧐

They are vague, but if they are talking about revenue, it makes more sense (although I still suspect those numbers are off). The Studio and Pro are higher priced compared to the Mac mini and the Mac mini is intentionally limited in terms of ports.

 

[Unregistered 4U]

I wonder if those estimates- which is all they are- are based on unit sales or revenue? It's hard/impossible to see the MacPro outselling the Mac Mini 3 to 1!!! 1% of all Mac sales to the Mac Mini only, and outsold by Studio and Pro? Hmmmm. 🧐

That was another curious thing about when they ran down their unit sales… when asked, they essentially said, “Oh, we sell Mac mini’s, too.” They didn’t even commit to a percentage of unit sales like they did with the Mac Pro, so that tells me that the mini would see even fewer unit sales. And, it makes sense. When you look at the mass computer buying public, they’re buying all-in-ones, whether that’s tablets, laptops or desktops. The mini is as much as a hobbyist/enthusiast machine as the other desktops, just nowhere near as powerful.

 

[cocoua]

Pretty much. Fortunately for Apple, there are massive numbers of folks NOT doing serious computing that don’t care.

sadly, it seems so

they make same money selling iPads to watch movies than Macs to make movies.

 

[ric22]

That was another curious thing about when they ran down their unit sales… when asked, they essentially said, “Oh, we sell Mac mini’s, too.” They didn’t even commit to a percentage of unit sales like they did with the Mac Pro, so that tells me that the mini would see even fewer unit sales. And, it makes sense. When you look at the mass computer buying public, they’re buying all-in-ones, whether that’s tablets, laptops or desktops. The mini is as much as a hobbyist/enthusiast machine as the other desktops, just nowhere near as powerful.

I've seen a lot of Mac Minis in use over the years, in business and in education... they're a lot cheaper than buying new iMacs, especially if you already own a nice screen. The port situation is better than an iMac too. If I didn't always buy MacBooks I'd get a Mini rather than a Studio or iMac for home use. So yeah, if those estimates are close to correct, I'm shocked!

Edit: who committed to Mac Pro unit sales? Apple? Or the guys in the link estimating?

 

[DavidSchaub]

Dude, Apple has a mouse that you have to flip over to charge and you’re going to try to say everything they do makes sense? 🤣🤣🤣

100%

Apple’s design and marketing and pricing decisions have “reasons” and those are sometimes garbage or just wrong. Don’t get me started on how thin the iMac is.

I trust their chip designs decisions to be far more practical.

I never said their choices were always right, I’m just saying: we shouldn’t expect to understand them.

 

[DavidSchaub]

The M2 Max Studio is a bad purchase now

not because there's a better chip coming—there's always a better chip coming

but because Apple only supports their computers for a given number of years from when they were first released so you're paying full price but getting one less year of updates. And the value will only get worse the longer they keep selling it.

Unless you just bought an Intel Mac, this seems really moot.

Apple even has stores (WallMart) still selling new M1 MBA. All Apple silicon Macs will keep OS support for many years.

Heck, Intel Macs still have at least one, maybe two, more new OS coming to them.

Apple will support the hardware as long as 95% of the market will care, and Apple doesn’t care about that last few percent.

 

[xraydoc]

my m1 Max does everything I needed to do. no upgrading for me probably ever LOL

I'm not paying another $3,000 or so and then get basically the same machine that does exactly the same things and I just saved 10 seconds of rendering.

lol nope

I'd probably still have my M1 Pro if it supported three external displays, but that was the main feature that got me to upgrade. Probably should have originally bought the M1 Max. But used that opportunity to increase the RAM from my old M1 Pro as well. For most tasks, the M1 Pro was sufficient for me (other than running low on RAM for my Windows VM and my need for a third external display).

 

[asiga]

Despite others saying Gurman is wrong, I think that the two rumours we got about the "AI servers" using M2 Ultra until M4 Ultra is available make it quite possible that we won't see M4 on the Studio for one year.

As a developer, my interest for the M3/M4 is not performance, but raytracing, for testing, debugging, and tuning raytracing code. If there's no M3/M4 Studio or Mini this summer, I'll wait (I had planned my money for this purchase, and it wouldn't be the first time that I put a Mac purchase on hold because Apple didn't release what I need).

 

[Chuckeee]

And Apple previously said (mea culpa daringfireball) that Mac Pro’s sales were a single percentage of all sales. Even with that, it’s likely way closer to 1% than 9%.

I would assume sales dollars not number of units.

 

[Chuckeee]

but because Apple only supports their computers for a given number of years from when they were first released

I thought Apple supported their computers for a given number years from when they were no longer being offered for sale in the Apple online store (excluding refurbished store sales)

 

[EugW]

I thought Apple supported their computers for a given number years from when they were no longer being offered for sale in the Apple online store (excluding refurbished store sales)

The 2017 MacBook Air was discontinued in July 2019, but the last macOS version it got was Monterey, which came out in 2021, just 2 years later. I was pretty sure it was going to get at least Ventura, but I was wrong.

In contrast, my 2017 MacBook was also discontinued in July 2019, but the last macOS version it got was Ventura, which came out in 2022.

 

[Joshuaorange]

my m1 Max does everything I needed to do. no upgrading for me probably ever LOL

I'm not paying another $3,000 or so and then get basically the same machine that does exactly the same things and I just saved 10 seconds of rendering.

lol nope

Me personally I’m glad I waited for m3 max with 128gb of ram. I use all of it. Though like you, I won’t be dropping another $5k even if they offer 256gb for a while.

 

[danwells]

The only problem with the performance of the M2 Ultra is the existence of the M3 Max. Most years, the M(n) Ultra will NOT be outperformed by the M(n+1) Max, so Apple can get away with skipping a year. This is a really bad year to ski on the high end. p, because the core count jump coupled with the move to 3 nm means the M3 Max is an unusual chip. M3s other than the Max are a "normal" update, because they didn't get extra P-cores, so they get the usual ~15% performance jump.

The (fully enabled) Max gets that usual jump PLUS a 50% P-core count jump. The Mac mini being M2 Pro instead of M3 Pro barely matters, because M3 Pro is only a little faster than M2 Pro. On the other hand, the M3 Max is as fast as the M2 Ultra (without the $1000 GPU upgrade on the Ultra). The M2 Ultra Mac Studio is only $200 cheaper than the similarly-performing M3 Max MacBook Pro in the same configuration (the premium for a laptop with identical configuration is generally closer to $1000 in this part of the market). Yes, you can get a couple of options (76 core GPU, 256 GB RAM) on the Studio that you can't get on the MBP - but both options are somewhat niche and very expensive.

The M2 Ultra Studio only had five months as the fastest Mac, and it's already had nearly seven months as "about as fast as a top-end laptop". If this rumor is true, it'll be 19 months in the M3 Max MBP's shadow (and seven or so of those with the M4 Max MBP out).

What seems more likely to me is that we're seeing M4 Max and Ultra sooner than we think (WWDC or September of this year). A previous poster wondered whether "M4" mostly means "M3 on TSMC's new N3E process, possibly with some Neural Engine tweaks". I could EASILY see Apple not releasing a chip NAMED M3 Ultra, and trying to get off the expensive N3B process ASAP. If the M4 is similar enough to the M3, they could release M4 Max/Ultra in the desktops soon, then put Pro/Max in the laptops in the fall. If this were the case, they'd have used N3B for one short generation, mostly to keep up an upgrade cadence, but also to release a small line of extraordinarily powerful laptops a year earlier than they otherwise could have, embarrassing the Wintel world and preempting the new Snapdragons.

 

[Defender Stargate]

My guess is that the chances of Apple not releasing any M4 Macs at WWDC after releasing it in the iPad and getting the party started for their big AI push with the M4, and the software development around that, is about zero.

They have known for a long time that there would not be an M3 Ultra, evidenced by the fact that the M3 Max doesn't have the Ultra interconnect. So they may have been working on the M4 Ultra (probably a single chip with no efficiency cores and more performance cores), since the M2 Ultra came out.

It makes total sense they would release these low volume machines first and get their cadence switched around to their advantage. And the only "evidence" I see saying it won't happen is the guy who said the same thing last year and was wrong.

 

[Fomalhaut]

Humm...he said this a few times. "If" he is wrong, then he loses massive credibility. There would be no reason to make these statements "unless" there is some truth in this (or someone at Apple is feeding him wrong rumors to kill rumor mill).

Apple of course "could" throw a curve ball, but why not release a m3 MacStudio in June and then the M4 next year?

We will just have to see what happens at WWDC24...

I don't think we'll see an M3 MacStudio because there appears to be no option for creating an M3 Ultra due to the missing interconnect on the M3 Max die.

There is speculation that the "Ultra" variants will no longer be created from joining two "Max" dies, and that it will be a new monolithic design, introduced with the M4.

I wish that Apple would just release the "best available" SoC into the Studio as soon as it becomes available, even if this means the "Ultra" variant is released 6-12 months later. I expect that the majority of Studios sold will be the Max variant, and that those who opt for the Ultra are on longer refresh cycles and are less worried about having the latests-and-greatest in their machines.

This approach would prevent potential studio buyers from delaying their purchases (or even leaving the Apple ecosystem). Of course some buyers would just get a 16" MBP with the latest Max SoC to avoid the wait....which a cynic might say is Apple's intention to benefit from the additional profit of the MBP over the Studio.

 

[EugW]

There is speculation that the "Ultra" variants will no longer be created from joining two "Max" dies, and that it will be a new monolithic design, introduced with the M4.

Wouldn't that be problematic? M3 Max is already something like 550 mm2. M4 Max would be even bigger, not just because of the new generation but also because N3E (M4 Series) is slightly less dense than N3B (M3 series). And M4 Ultra would be so big it'd be reaching the limits of TSMC's chip size max (800-850 mm2?).

I wish that Apple would just release the "best available" SoC into the Studio as soon as it becomes available, even if this means the "Ultra" variant is released 6-12 months later. I expect that the majority of Studios sold will be the Max variant, and that those who opt for the Ultra are on longer refresh cycles and are less worried about having the latests-and-greatest in their machines.

This approach would prevent potential studio buyers from delaying their purchases (or even leaving the Apple ecosystem). Of course some buyers would just get a 16" MBP with the latest Max SoC to avoid the wait....which a cynic might say is Apple's intention to benefit from the additional profit of the MBP over the Studio.

I don't think releasing an M4 Max Mac Studio in 2024 and then releasing an M4 Ultra Mac Studio in 2025 makes much sense.

 

[Fomalhaut]

As an M2 Mac Studio owner i hope this is true, i spent £2333 on my mac studio last year after WWDC , and i hope that they do the M4 Next year so i can upgrade in 2 years from my original purchase. because one year on a machine like this is ridiculous. it is still ridiculously powerful. and RT Cores honestly makes no difference on m3 or m4 for me.

Why is a yearly release schedule ridiculous? It gives people who have yet to buy a new Mac the option to benefit from the latest (or at least < 1 year old) technology, and also keeps up the momentum of technological advance which in turn drives sales cycles.

You appear to be speaking from the perspective of someone who is already an owner that doesn't want anyone else to own a better computer than yours because it would mean you no longer have the "latest and greatest". That is a rather pointless mindset IMO.

 

[turbineseaplane]

Why is a yearly release schedule ridiculous?

It's not
They don't have to go crazy with annual updates, but at least update the key internals and stay on the cutting edge

 

[Joshuaorange]

100%

Apple’s design and marketing and pricing decisions have “reasons” and those are sometimes garbage or just wrong. Don’t get me started on how thin the iMac is.

I trust their chip designs decisions to be far more practical.

I never said their choices were always right, I’m just saying: we shouldn’t expect to understand them.

I don’t mind the thinness of the iMac. What I can’t stand is the 2 tone, solid and pastel colorway they went with 🤮🤮🤮

 

[danwells]

They don'n need to go yearly every year - but at least release when there's a 50% performance jump in the likely chips. It's crazy to leave the M2 Ultra out there in the breeze when the M3 Max versus M2 Ultra performance comparison is what it is. Far better to have skipped M2, where there wasn't a major core jump in the higher-end chips.