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

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.
I won't say it's ridiculous, but I feel it may not make much financial sense even from Apple's perspective either.

Already, desktop Macs are a minority of Mac sales overall (I think laptops make up about 80%), and the Mac Studio is likely a fraction of that fraction. Then you consider that many people who have jumped on the Apple Silicon bandwagon and gotten an M1x or M2x Mac Studio, and these devices are easily good for 5-7 years at least, even if you can't readily upgrade the internals.

Then there are also the costs involved in coming up with a new M3 or M4 ultra chip, which doesn't see any use in laptops.

At this juncture, I don't think Apple is going to see significant sales from releasing an upgraded Mac Studio so soon. It's not that it's a bad product. It's just that this market segment is pretty saturated. So it may not be a bad idea to stretch out the upgrade cycle to every 2-3 years, to ensure that there are more people ready and willing to upgrade when the time comes.
 
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.
While not completely ridiculous, it's also probably not financially beneficial to Apple to update the Mac Pro and Mac Studio every single year. The yearly sales volume is low, and updating the hardware is not a free endeavour. Plus the Mx Ultra chips are very expensive to develop and manufacture, so putting all this effort into a yearly update schedule would basically be like Apple treating these computers as loss leaders for the Mac world.

EDIT:

@Abazigal beat me to it.

P.S. I've said it before and I'll say it again, my expectation is that the MacBooks will be updated on a 12-18 month refresh cycle, but the desktops will be on an 18-24 month cycle, or perhaps even longer.
 
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.
It might be crazy, but it is very Apple.

Why would Apple bother rev'ing these low volume products so quickly?

Apple is fine with a few percent of customers being bothered by this.

If you need the M2 Ultra's RAM or ports or GPU power, you'll wait.

People who can make do with the M3 Max are welcome to buy a MacBook Pro. Apple figures that everyone can survive waiting. If is lose them some sales because of that, I'm sure they've calculated that it would cost them MORE to rev the products.

Vs...
- the 2013 Mac Pro rotting for FOUR years before the iMac Pro,
- the iMac Pro rotting for THREE years before the the 2019 Mac Pro,
- the 2019 Mac Pro rotting for THREE years before the Mac Studio.

If annual pro-computer releases are your thing, I would suggest giving up on Apple. :p

Skipping the M3, which is on a process node that Apple wants off, certainly makes the most sense.

Time will tell when the M4 Max/Ultra/Quadra(?) will be available.
 
Last edited:
M4 Max theoretically could run in a Mac mini but Apple likely won’t go there. M4 Max makes much more sense in a Mac Studio not only because of the thermal advantages of Mac Studio, but also because of the additional ports.

It also makes more sense from a marketing perspective.


Possibility #3 is what I believe: M3 Ultra will never exist in retail and Mac Studio will jump directly to M4 Max and M4 Ultra, and Mac mini will jump to M4… in 2025. No Mac Studio or Mac mini at WWDC 2024.
Your option #3 sounds quite plausible. I would love to see an M4 Max & Ultra in a new Studio at WWDC, but would be surprised to see these become available so soon after the base M4 release in the iPad. Late 2024 for an M4 Max Studio would be OK, but mid-2025 would be a long time to wait assuming that an M4 Max MacBook Pro is expected in late 2024.

It will be interesting to see how an M4 Pro Mac Mini compares to the current M2 Max Studio, and whether the same "Mac Mini vs Mac Studio" upgrade maths applies, i.e. making an upgrade of the Mac Mini poor value compared to a base Mac Studio.
 
I won't say it's ridiculous, but I feel it may not make much financial sense even from Apple's perspective either.

Already, desktop Macs are a minority of Mac sales overall (I think laptops make up about 80%), and the Mac Studio is likely a fraction of that fraction. Then you consider that many people who have jumped on the Apple Silicon bandwagon and gotten an M1x or M2x Mac Studio, and these devices are easily good for 5-7 years at least, even if you can't readily upgrade the internals.

Then there are also the costs involved in coming up with a new M3 or M4 ultra chip, which doesn't see any use in laptops.

At this juncture, I don't think Apple is going to see significant sales from releasing an upgraded Mac Studio so soon. It's not that it's a bad product. It's just that this market segment is pretty saturated. So it may not be a bad idea to stretch out the upgrade cycle to every 2-3 years, to ensure that there are more people ready and willing to upgrade when the time comes.
While not completely ridiculous, it's also probably not financially beneficial to Apple to update the Mac Pro and Mac Studio every single year. The yearly sales volume is low, and updating the hardware is not a free endeavour. Plus the Mx Ultra chips are very expensive to develop and manufacture, so putting all this effort into a yearly update schedule would basically be like Apple treating these computers as loss leaders for the Mac world.

EDIT:

@Abazigal beat me to it.

P.S. I've said it before and I'll say it again, my expectation is that the MacBooks will be updated on a 12-18 month refresh cycle, but the desktops will be on an 18-24 month cycle, or perhaps even longer.

I totally agree that the desktop Macs do not need to be on a yearly upgrade cycle, but the issue is the timing of the release and the alignment to the latest SoC versions. Having the the SoC in thetop-tier Macs lag the laptops by up to a year or more feels like "lost time" both in the sense of simply not being able to use the latest tech, and potentially diminishing the total time the product will be supported.

If an M4 Max MBP were to be released in late 2024, it would be better if an M4 Max Studio were released at the same time, or even slightly earlier in order to create a "flagship effect" for the new SoC. If the Studio has to wait another 6-9 months that effect is lost. The M(x)-Ultra may take a little bit longer for technical reasons, but I don't see why it needs to delay the launch of the M(x)-Max.
 
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.

Yep. I find it quite frustrating that there are many things my M3 Max does better than my M2 Ultra.

Apple’s attitude towards the desktop market continues to disappoint. Even though Apple Silicon made laptops significantly better, I still don’t want to use one as a desktop replacement. I need the extra ports but I also need the power. Currently no Mac gives me both. M2Ultra Mac Studio gives me ports. M3 Max MacBook Pro gives me the extra power I need. And M4 Max MacBook Pro will release sooner than the Mac Studio so it’s even more of a gap.
 
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.
I agree, it generally makes sense to buy the best computer for your needs at the time the need arises, and not much sense in getting cranky about it when something later and greater comes out - that's always going to happen. That said, for someone who's not an owner yet, it's difficult to pull the trigger on an expensive new computer that's two chip versions out of date, especially when the newest version will be geared more toward the tasks you're going to be using it for.

I've said it before, and it may just be wishful thinking, but I think the M4 makes sense to go into a Studio sooner rather than later, from any perspective it's looked at. Possibly as soon as WWDC, and it makes more sense the more I consider it in context of Apple's other recent releases.

If we look at the M3, it was a total flex on Apple's part. They released it 495 days after the M2, 121 days less than it took to go from M1 to M2. And they released it simultaneously alongside the M3 Pro and Max (just 286 days from when they released the M2 Pro and Max). It took them 342 days to go from M1 to M1 Pro and M1 Max.

There was a lot of speculation why the M3 Max didn't have an interconnect, leading some to believe the M3 Ultra would be an all-in-one monolithic chip. That was perfectly reasonable assumption based on the details at the time. I doubt that's going to be the case, no monolithic M3 Ultra (or M4 Ultra for that matter).

They released the M4 just 198 days after the M3, M3 Pro, M3 Max. To me, that says they developed the two chips virtually side-by-side with one another, and from the very start never intended to release an M3 Ultra, so they never bothered with the interconnect on M3. They were working on getting the M4 out, and M3 served as both a flex on how quick of a turnaround they could get on their high-end chips (first to market with 3nm!) as well as a stopgap through a short lived, expensive 3nm technology. Being developed in near-parallel with M3, M4 was ready to go at almost the same time as the M3, demonstrated by the production ramp-up and release of the M4 on iPad with apparently high enough yields to ship as many as people will order in less than 200 days from the M3's release.

Apple doesn't seem to be slowing up its Mx releases, quite they opposite, they seem to be accelerating. I suspect the M4 Max and Ultra are going to be the next releases, and that when we see the M4 Max it's going to have an interconnect designed in and M4 Ultra will be two Max joined together. The only reason the interconnect didn't exist on the M3 Max was because the M4 Ultra was on its way sooner rather than later. To me, the timing makes sense to do a WWDC or summer release as content creation machines built for modern AI workloads, a perfect complement to the assumed content of this year's WWDC. This seems especially likely in light of the relatively recent release of the M3 laptops. If they put the M4 Max and M4 Ultra on Studios and maybe Pros this summer, they've kept up with or only minorly delayed an annual release schedule on those, and assuming chip production is still ramping up, it also makes sense to release the M4 on machines that have less sales volume. They almost can't release M4 MacBook Pros for several months, or the outrage would be immense from M3 purchasers, coming so quickly on the heels of M3 MBPs. Taking into account the higher demand for laptops, they may not even have the appropriate capacity built up yet. They can then update the laptops later in the year to catch those up to M4 and have a complete or near-complete M4 rollout done before 2024 is out and to reap sales for that full lineup through the Christmas season. And it gives people something to be excited for from Apple for basically the entire year. There's no losing.

On the other hand, if they slow-roll the M4 machines and drag it out until middle or late 2025, it becomes old news very quickly. People will be wondering where the M5 is already. It also delays sales to creators who will whine about abandonment (see pre-Mx Pro desktops for examples), and it will indicate a significant slowdown in their chip development which they haven't demonstrated to-date. So far they've only shown an acceleration, and it would fit very well if their ultimate intention is to establish an annual cadence for Mx similar to what they have for iPhone. A new chip every year, fancy new laptops every winter, fancy new desktops every summer.

Anyway, that's my best guess based on available information (accelerating Mx releases, no interconnect on M3, release of M4 just 6 months after M3). I really expect we'll see M4 Max & Ultra on low volume machines at WWDC or at some point this summer, M4 MBPs toward the end of the year ahead of the holiday. M4 Max will have an interconnect to allow 2 to be joined into an Ultra. If it helps, maybe consider M4 more as M3.5: AI Edition. :) Of course, Bloomberg doesn't pay me big bucks to stare at a calendar and make wild guesses about Apple release dates, I just enjoy doing it for free alongside everyone else.
 
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?
Apple was reported to have said said single digit percentage of unit sales of Mac Pro’s. Did not offer the same assessment for minis. I don’t doubt that there’s millions out there, but, as mobiles have been outselling desktops for years, it makes sense that the nice screen that’s most important to a very large number of folks, is the one they can take with them (and it’s not like mobile devices can’t use large unmoving screens, best of both worlds). Like you say, if you weren’t buying a mobile device, you’d potentially buy the mini… that describes the market very well.

Even considering the mini’s purpose of a “switcher” machine... Given that the market has been massively mobile for awhile, any switchers these days are more than likely coming from a mobile device. A mini would be out of the question.
 
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.
Apple has a captive audience… anyone who CAN leave already has. Everyone else either
A. Likes macOS a lot or
B. Needs Final Cut Pro, Xcode, or Logic, and those are only on macOS

I wouldn’t say that’s a cynic’s point of view, that’s the reality of today’s market, and it’s been true for many years. No one making desktops and laptops are selling more desktops anymore.
 
Apple was reported to have said said single digit percentage of unit sales of Mac Pro’s. Did not offer the same assessment for minis. I don’t doubt that there’s millions out there, but, as mobiles have been outselling desktops for years, it makes sense that the nice screen that’s most important to a very large number of folks, is the one they can take with them (and it’s not like mobile devices can’t use large unmoving screens, best of both worlds). Like you say, if you weren’t buying a mobile device, you’d potentially buy the mini… that describes the market very well.

Even considering the mini’s purpose of a “switcher” machine... Given that the market has been massively mobile for awhile, any switchers these days are more than likely coming from a mobile device. A mini would be out of the question.
Ah, that peculiar "single digit" reference again... you didn't say that was from over 7 years ago! I imagine back then they sold more.
 
I agree, it generally makes sense to buy the best computer for your needs at the time the need arises, and not much sense in getting cranky about it when something later and greater comes out - that's always going to happen. That said, for someone who's not an owner yet, it's difficult to pull the trigger on an expensive new computer that's two chip versions out of date, especially when the newest version will be geared more toward the tasks you're going to be using it for.

I've said it before, and it may just be wishful thinking, but I think the M4 makes sense to go into a Studio sooner rather than later, from any perspective it's looked at. Possibly as soon as WWDC, and it makes more sense the more I consider it in context of Apple's other recent releases.

If we look at the M3, it was a total flex on Apple's part. They released it 495 days after the M2, 121 days less than it took to go from M1 to M2. And they released it simultaneously alongside the M3 Pro and Max (just 286 days from when they released the M2 Pro and Max). It took them 342 days to go from M1 to M1 Pro and M1 Max.

There was a lot of speculation why the M3 Max didn't have an interconnect, leading some to believe the M3 Ultra would be an all-in-one monolithic chip. That was perfectly reasonable assumption based on the details at the time. I doubt that's going to be the case, no monolithic M3 Ultra (or M4 Ultra for that matter).

They released the M4 just 198 days after the M3, M3 Pro, M3 Max. To me, that says they developed the two chips virtually side-by-side with one another, and from the very start never intended to release an M3 Ultra, so they never bothered with the interconnect on M3. They were working on getting the M4 out, and M3 served as both a flex on how quick of a turnaround they could get on their high-end chips (first to market with 3nm!) as well as a stopgap through a short lived, expensive 3nm technology. Being developed in near-parallel with M3, M4 was ready to go at almost the same time as the M3, demonstrated by the production ramp-up and release of the M4 on iPad with apparently high enough yields to ship as many as people will order in less than 200 days from the M3's release.

Apple doesn't seem to be slowing up its Mx releases, quite they opposite, they seem to be accelerating. I suspect the M4 Max and Ultra are going to be the next releases, and that when we see the M4 Max it's going to have an interconnect designed in and M4 Ultra will be two Max joined together. The only reason the interconnect didn't exist on the M3 Max was because the M4 Ultra was on its way sooner rather than later. To me, the timing makes sense to do a WWDC or summer release as content creation machines built for modern AI workloads, a perfect complement to the assumed content of this year's WWDC. This seems especially likely in light of the relatively recent release of the M3 laptops. If they put the M4 Max and M4 Ultra on Studios and maybe Pros this summer, they've kept up with or only minorly delayed an annual release schedule on those, and assuming chip production is still ramping up, it also makes sense to release the M4 on machines that have less sales volume. They almost can't release M4 MacBook Pros for several months, or the outrage would be immense from M3 purchasers, coming so quickly on the heels of M3 MBPs. Taking into account the higher demand for laptops, they may not even have the appropriate capacity built up yet. They can then update the laptops later in the year to catch those up to M4 and have a complete or near-complete M4 rollout done before 2024 is out and to reap sales for that full lineup through the Christmas season. And it gives people something to be excited for from Apple for basically the entire year. There's no losing.

On the other hand, if they slow-roll the M4 machines and drag it out until middle or late 2025, it becomes old news very quickly. People will be wondering where the M5 is already. It also delays sales to creators who will whine about abandonment (see pre-Mx Pro desktops for examples), and it will indicate a significant slowdown in their chip development which they haven't demonstrated to-date. So far they've only shown an acceleration, and it would fit very well if their ultimate intention is to establish an annual cadence for Mx similar to what they have for iPhone. A new chip every year, fancy new laptops every winter, fancy new desktops every summer.

Anyway, that's my best guess based on available information (accelerating Mx releases, no interconnect on M3, release of M4 just 6 months after M3). I really expect we'll see M4 Max & Ultra on low volume machines at WWDC or at some point this summer, M4 MBPs toward the end of the year ahead of the holiday. M4 Max will have an interconnect to allow 2 to be joined into an Ultra. If it helps, maybe consider M4 more as M3.5: AI Edition. :) Of course, Bloomberg doesn't pay me big bucks to stare at a calendar and make wild guesses about Apple release dates, I just enjoy doing it for free alongside everyone else.
Long and thoughtful, thanks. I no longer know what I think, but I do think there will be some clarification at WWDC. I could see them launch the M4 Mini and M4 Pro Mini, but I think they will leave MacBook Pro alone until the M4 Max and M4 Ultra launch together (with second-generation UltraFusion packaging). On the other hand, it's MacBook Air's turn to lead the way on the consumer Macs (I don't include the Mini in that category), so it shouldn't surprise anyone if the M4 MacBook Air launches at WWDC.

[For M1, it was a sort of hybrid launch: MacBook Air got it first, but the first product redesign for Apple Silicon was the M1 iMac; M2 MacBook Air led the way; M3 iMac led the way; so...]

As you rightly point out, it looks like Apple saw an opening with N3E/N3P, and they are taking advantage of it. I profoundly disagree with the people who insist N3 (N3B) is a failed node, but I'm tired of refuting them, it's whack-a-mole. I think your basic premise is correct (that M3 and M4 were developed in parallel, much like the unprecedented parallel development of N3 and N3E), but missing a detail, which is that N3E didn't go into production until the fourth quarter of last year, more than a year after N3. So it's a safe bet that A18 is going full tilt as we speak, along with M4 and M4 Pro.

TSMC has recently (May 15) said that they expect most N3 tape outs "to go to N3P" (an optical shrink of N3E) in the second half of this year. The quote says "N3" but I read that as saying they expect most N3E tape outs to switch to N3P because the transition is seamless and N3P is where TSMC is adding capacity. But I guess it's also possible to read it as saying "Apple's N3 tape outs will go to N3P."

That's a long way of saying I think that M4 Max and M4 Ultra will launch on N3P, not N3E, so Apple is going to wait for that. But October/November doesn't seem out of reach, because of the unusual status of N3E/N3P.
 
Long and thoughtful, thanks. I no longer know what I think, but I do think there will be some clarification at WWDC. I could see them launch the M4 Mini and M4 Pro Mini, but I think they will leave MacBook Pro alone until the M4 Max and M4 Ultra launch together (with second-generation UltraFusion packaging). On the other hand, it's MacBook Air's turn to lead the way on the consumer Macs (I don't include the Mini in that category), so it shouldn't surprise anyone if the M4 MacBook Air launches at WWDC.
The reason why I'm not optimistic for a Mac launch at WWDC is the timing.

It's far too early for an M4 MacBook Air IMO. They'll keep it at M3. In fact, I don't expect an M4 MacBook Air until 2025. The M3 MBA came out in March. WWDC is June. It's extremely unlikely they will replace the M3 MBA just 3 months after its introduction.

Also if they don't release the new MacBook Pros, I don't see them releasing the Mac mini either, precisely because of the M4 Pro.
 
Ah, that peculiar "single digit" reference again... you didn't say that was from over 7 years ago! I imagine back then they sold more.
Yes, Apple doesn’t say much about unit sales, so it was uncharacteristic at the time (and is the best description from Apple that we’re going to get). And, considering the state of both the Mac Pro and the mini since then (especially with Apple selling more mobiles), the percentage of unit sales of those two are likely much lower than they were seven years ago.
 
Seems odd that they'd go that long without bringing accelerated ray tracing to their Pro desktops.
 
Seems odd that they'd go that long without bringing accelerated ray tracing to their Pro desktops.
It isn’t like the previous Mac cannot do ray tracing, it is just that ray tracing is a more processor intensive task. And as long as you Mac is fast enough and has sufficient processing bandwidth it probably doesn’t matter.
 
The reason why I'm not optimistic for a Mac launch at WWDC is the timing.

It's far too early for an M4 MacBook Air IMO. They'll keep it at M3. In fact, I don't expect an M4 MacBook Air until 2025. The M3 MBA came out in March. WWDC is June. It's extremely unlikely they will replace the M3 MBA just 3 months after its introduction.

Also if they don't release the new MacBook Pros, I don't see them releasing the Mac mini either, precisely because of the M4 Pro.
Yeah, I know it’s crazy talk re: the Air, but I just wanted to make the point that all bets are off. Far more likely is it never gets M4…

I do think Apple learned from the M2 launch, when the Air spent more than six months out in front by itself, before the Pro/Max release. But I can’t guess what they learned without information I’m never going to have, so we’ll see…
 
The only reason I can see for putting M4 in the MacBook Air is cost-cutting. If N3B carries a large cost premium, they may be very anxious to transition everything to N3E (this goes along with the theory that M4 is more or less an N3E version of M3).

On the other hand, getting the Studio/Pro off of M2 Ultra is a performance consideration. Thinking in terms of P-cores (all pro machines have adequate e-cores for your e-mail and Word needs), going from 16 cores to 24 (or more if M4 Max/Ultra have another P-core jump) is a big deal.
 
TSMC has recently (May 15) said that they expect most N3 tape outs "to go to N3P" (an optical shrink of N3E) in the second half of this year. The quote says "N3" but I read that as saying they expect most N3E tape outs to switch to N3P because the transition is seamless and N3P is where TSMC is adding capacity. But I guess it's also possible to read it as saying "Apple's N3 tape outs will go to N3P."

That's a long way of saying I think that M4 Max and M4 Ultra will launch on N3P, not N3E, so Apple is going to wait for that. But October/November doesn't seem out of reach, because of the unusual status of N3E/N3P.
If this is the case with N3E, then it sounds like it would be ideal for the laptops later - lower power consumption\less space and they will have more of them as that's where they are adding capacity.
 
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.
I would think from a business side that put a M3 in the Mac Studio & Mac Pro and then in spring of 2025 add M4. But Apple of course knows how to make money, so we will probably just have to see what happens at WWDC.
 
I would think from a business side that put a M3 in the Mac Studio & Mac Pro and then in spring of 2025 add M4. But Apple of course knows how to make money, so we will probably just have to see what happens at WWDC.
It's likely precisely because of the business side why M3 series is not in the Mac Studio and Mac Pro. N3B is problematic. The M4 series is manufactured on N3E, which is more viable.
 
Your option #3 sounds quite plausible. I would love to see an M4 Max & Ultra in a new Studio at WWDC, but would be surprised to see these become available so soon after the base M4 release in the iPad. Late 2024 for an M4 Max Studio would be OK, but mid-2025 would be a long time to wait assuming that an M4 Max MacBook Pro is expected in late 2024.

It will be interesting to see how an M4 Pro Mac Mini compares to the current M2 Max Studio, and whether the same "Mac Mini vs Mac Studio" upgrade maths applies, i.e. making an upgrade of the Mac Mini poor value compared to a base Mac Studio.
Why wait? iPad's and Desktop Macs are on a different stage of usage and need. Those who are in the market for Desktop Macs don't really care about iPads and will not "cut" in the sales of iPads. So releasing M4 desktops after iPad doesn't really matter. I don't see a Mac Studio customer saying, "Well...they are not releasing a M4 Studio, so I will buy an iPad instead. They will buy a MacBook Pro instead (as I had when forced to do prior to the M1 studio release days (no choice - for work). So a release of M4 iPads does not effect Mac desktop potential buyers.

If they have developed iPad's with M4's, then they already have Mac Pro and Studio M4's ready. Probably Apple is doing the sales spread sheet analysis to see when they need to jump up in some sales to look good for their quarterly results. As far as technology wise, no reason to wait to release. It has been a year already since M2 came out, so M2 buyers cannot be upset as a yearly upgrade is understandable though maybe not be necessary.

Apple now bases release on maximizing sales and not technological advancements. Yes, the volume of sales on the Mac Studio and Mac Pro are low compared to iPads and MacBook airs, but as far as technology wise, there is no reason to wait. Putting a M3 in the M2 Studio and Mac Pro would not be (as far as my limited understanding), a major redesign to fit the M3 chip into the M2 slots (basic summary). Maybe someone else might explain/correct my thought. Now maybe from M2 to M4 may be more of a design cost jump and might be why it makes sense to wait until next year.

Again, we will have a good idea the game plan this coming WWDC event.
 
Why wait? iPad's and Desktop Macs are on a different stage of usage and need. Those who are in the market for Desktop Macs don't really care about iPads and will not "cut" in the sales of iPads. So releasing M4 desktops after iPad doesn't really matter. I don't see a Mac Studio customer saying, "Well...they are not releasing a M4 Studio, so I will buy an iPad instead. They will buy a MacBook Pro instead (as I had when forced to do prior to the M1 studio release days (no choice - for work). So a release of M4 iPads does not effect Mac desktop potential buyers.

If they have developed iPad's with M4's, then they already have Mac Pro and Studio M4's ready. Probably Apple is doing the sales spread sheet analysis to see when they need to jump up in some sales to look good for their quarterly results. As far as technology wise, no reason to wait to release. It has been a year already since M2 came out, so M2 buyers cannot be upset as a yearly upgrade is understandable though maybe not be necessary.

Apple now bases release on maximizing sales and not technological advancements. Yes, the volume of sales on the Mac Studio and Mac Pro are low compared to iPads and MacBook airs, but as far as technology wise, there is no reason to wait. Putting a M3 in the M2 Studio and Mac Pro would not be (as far as my limited understanding), a major redesign to fit the M3 chip into the M2 slots (basic summary). Maybe someone else might explain/correct my thought. Now maybe from M2 to M4 may be more of a design cost jump and might be why it makes sense to wait until next year.

Again, we will have a good idea the game plan this coming WWDC event.
while I was writing this, someone gave a good reason why Apple might skip to M4. It makes sense if there is a little complications with M3. If it is not just a similar configuration from M2 to M3, then it make sense to maybe wait instead of invest in a M3 Studio and Pro. I have changed my thoughts about the topic. :)
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Back
Top