The smart money is on 13” MacBook Air and MacBook Pro with M3 before Christmas, and MacBook Pro’s early next year.
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.
Gurman: Refreshed High-End MacBook Pro and Mac Mini With M3 Chips to Launch Next Year
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Agree on your first paragraph (M3 won't be magical), but I think you ignore compound interest. 20% in 6 years results in 1.2^6 = 2.985 increase. So if it's on the high end, in 4 years we get to 2x (2.0736), and in 6 years to almost 3x. With a more balanced 16% it's 8 years, of course.
Which again highlights how much 20% YoY actually is…
Workload type also plays a role in how "fast" newer technology feels.
My workloads are such that M1 is still enough and neither M2 nor M3 will make them any faster because the "delay" is my input, not the machine's output.
But time-based workloads like software compiling or video output, a 20% reduction each generation is probably directly noticeable.
My workloads are such that M1 is still enough and neither M2 nor M3 will make them any faster because the "delay" is my input, not the machine's output.
But time-based workloads like software compiling or video output, a 20% reduction each generation is probably directly noticeable.
If we get 20% every year, that would be amazing and I hope you’re right. But every year it gets harder and harder to make progress and the gains get smaller and smaller. M1 was in 2020, M2 was in 2022 and the M3 may be late this year but basically 2024. It seems like we are on a two year cycle as the M series names go, but more like a 4 year cycle when it comes to the actual die shrinks, if we get lucky. Let’s see when the next die shrink happens after the M3. I think it’s going to be quite a while. I’m not trying to be pessimistic, more realistic, at least in my mind. Perhaps Apple will figure out quantum computing and we’ll all be off to the races again! 😉
Too soon to be pessimistic. What people KEEP ignoring is the extent to which covid (remember that?) screwed up both Apple and TSMC's plans.
The M3 (and A17) are interesting specifically because they represent more or less the first products since the M1/A15 whose schedules weren't demolished by covid, and thus a chance to see real innovation rather than the coasting that was required for the M2 and A16.
IMO This is obviously just strategy to keep the Mac Pro relevant since they can't do multiprocessor. Jobs believed in cannibalizing yourself rather than letting others do it to you, but I suspect that Cook's Apple is all about stratification and ********.
R&D and Manufacturing run parallel, of course there was some delay because of Covid, especially in the first year where we saw fallen demand. But I dont believe there was a huge impact on R&D. We reached a point where it gets harder and harder shrinking dies. So the problems related to Covid, probably would have been occured anyways. And shrinking the die size doesnt mean there will always be a huge performance advantage, at least at first.
For example, when Intel went to 10nm the performance boost wasnt quite significant, after years went by and Intel were optimizing the process, there was a significant boost in performance.
Of cource there will be improvements and performance gains at 3nm, but probably not as much as you think.
This is an interesting question. With all the different “nodes” being discussed now with problems with yield, do the original gains in efficiency and power being bandied about still hold? Were they theoretical or based on actual prototypes? Are there other challenges besides at the manufacturing stage?
Why? So y'all can get Studio performance with Mini heat removal and Mini price? That makes no sense for the product line IMO.
I guess it depends on workloads of course, but the change in daily operation for me was huge when I went from RAM-starved 16 GB MBP to 96 GB M2 MBP.Workload type also plays a role in how "fast" newer technology feels.
My workloads are such that M1 is still enough and neither M2 nor M3 will make them any faster because the "delay" is my input, not the machine's output.
But time-based workloads like software compiling or video output, a 20% reduction each generation is probably directly noticeable.
And, I might add, random internet publications where the more outlandish claims they make, the more people repeat those claims (pointing back to the originator of course) and the more views they get and the more money they make.
Knowing how freakishly good Apple is at tracking down leakers, they may not be high in regional leadership for long, just from this post.Your friend no matter how high in regional leadership would not be privy to TSMCs data, and if you email them directly they will give you a decent reply.
Yield rates on all new manufacturing processes start of poor in the region of 50-55% and if you look at the production figures for previous generation of chips you'd see its nothing unusual and thereafter the yield rises considerably into the 80+%
TSMC Second-Gen 3nm Arrives as N3E Chips Get Taped Out
Alphawave's ZeusCore100 is one of the first in linewww.tomshardware.com
Any information anyone outside of those directly in contact with what’s going on (and those folks aren’t talking, again, because of how good Apple has gotten) is working on months old information, at best, from folks no longer associated with the project. So, when they’re saying, today that yields are low, yields are low at the start of EVERY run. It’s not surprising.
M3 are designed for Macs in mind. It makes perfect sense to launch the M3 on all the base model Macs which is the 13” MBA, 13” MBP, and iMac first. All of this models are for the casual user. Once the M3 is out then comes the staggered release of the M3 Pro, Max and last but not least Ultra for next year.
How is M3 rush? 13” M2 MBA will have been around for nearly a year and a half by October. Can’t help it with M2 for 15” MBA so that Apple could focus to put all M3s on the 13”MBA. With 15” MBA purely for web browsing and media consumption for the bigger screen real estate M2 is good for 7-10 years. At least for 13” people would do for work too.
Portability of the MBA would have people replacing the MBA sooner due to rough handling etc. If I have an iMac I would not bother thinking of a new one as long as I could still power it on.
Uh, so much for that, I guess?
Anyways, still no Mac mini. What are people's thoughts on how far an M3 mini is off?
It depends on yields at the chip fab. The M3 will go into the highest margin machines first, then into the portables where improved battery life is important. The mini doesn't fit either of those situations
Due to the reduced memory buss speed in the M3 chips, I think the M2 Pro mini will out perform an imagined M3 mini for memory based tasks. That is why I acquired a M2 Pro mini in January 2024 with max memory, 10Gb ethernet and a 2TB SSD to work as a file server when home and a primary computer during the summer when in the RV Park.
Your house is wired with Cat 7 ethernet cable? I'm impressed. My server is a 2014 mini which is enough to keep the gigabit ethernet running at capacity. Upgrading the cat 5 and 5e cable here would-be major surgery, as in holes in walls. This house is also lathe and plaster, wifi signals on 5 GHz die quickly as in two walls.
Edit, Cat 6, not 7, though I see Cat 6A is needed for the full distance.
Last edited:
I see the M2 chip inventory having to be used up by the Mini series at this point. Perhaps the next refresh for a mini might be the M4 next year or later