M1 Pro 32GB RAM vs. M1 Max 32GB RAM -- speed difference?

[Hammie]

Maybe I am searching the wrong thing, but I was wondering if the 32GB RAM speed is the same on both the M1 Pro and M1 Max chip. I know the M1 Pro claims 'up to 200Gbps' and M1 Max claims 'up to 400Gbps'. However, I was not able to find any specs on each level, i.e., do they eqate to the following -- 16GB = 100Mbps, 32GB = 200Mbps, and 64GB = 400Mbps? Or are they the max speeds of each chip, no matter what RAM size you choose?

I currently have a 14" 10/16/16GB/1TB configuration in Space Gray (which I have regretted getting since shortly after my return window). I should have went with Silver and 32GB but the store only had Space Gray with the 1TB drive.

I am considering selling it and getting on with 32GB RAM in silver (I prefer the classic look). But I am not sure if the slight difference in cost is worth the price increase or not for the M1 Pro (10/16/32GB/1TB) versus the binned M1 Max (10/24/32GB/1TB).

BTW, although my memory pressure stays in the green, I am almost always at 14-15GB used RAM and 5-8GB swap. I really only use Safari or Chrome, mail, messages, O365 apps, Lightroom CC, and VMWare Horizon Client (to access my remote desktop for work).

I think I have watched every YouTube video and skimmed every article on the Internet regarding the memory comparisons, but no one has mentioned the speed of 32GB Pro versus Max.

 

[mfram]

My interpretation of the presentation they did when they announced the chips is that a "Max" is effectively two "Pro" chips fused together. Max will have double the RAM "chips" as the Pro and double the hardware to access the RAM. So the RAM on the Max is always going to be up to twice as fast even with the same amount of RAM as the Pro.

Edit: The Max isn't two fused Pros. But the M1 Buyer's Guide on this site does list Quad-channel memory access on the Max vs. Dual-channel on the Pro. So, yes, the memory bandwidth will be twice as fast on the Max. But the number of memory cells would be the same with the same amount of memory.

 

[Yebubbleman]

My interpretation of the presentation they did when they announced the chips is that a "Max" is effectively two "Pro" chips fused together. Max will have double the RAM "chips" as the Pro and double the hardware to access the RAM. So the RAM on the Max is always going to be up to twice as fast even with the same amount of RAM as the Pro.

You might be mistaking the presentation on the M1 Pro and M1 Max for the one for the Mac Studio and the M1 Ultra. The Max isn't a doubling of the Pro, despite many of the specs being doubled. Whereas the M1 Ultra really is two M1 Max SoCs fused together.

 

[zonai]

I don't think it's worth getting the M1 Max over the M1 Pro for memory bandwidth reasons. The M1 Max has worse battery life because of the increased GPU cores, which is a more noticeable day-to-day impact.

 

[JPack]

M1 Max has a 512-bit memory interface, double the Pro. You get 400 GB/sec with every memory configuration. That is why Max forces you to get 32GB. It has 4x8GB chips, each 128-bit.

In short, 32GB Max offers double the memory bandwidth of 32GB Pro.

 

[zonai]

M1 Max has a 512-bit memory interface, double the Pro. You get 400 GB/sec with every memory configuration. That is why Max forces you to get 32GB. It has 4x8GB chips, each 128-bit.

In short, 32GB Max offers double the memory bandwidth of 32GB Pro.

My bad, I checked the die shot on Anandtech and I had the wrong impression earlier. I was thinking the 400GB/s only applied to 64GB but it seems it's for all memory sizes. Still, for the OP's workloads, I don't think there would be a noticeable difference. Intel's flagship i9-13900K, which just launched, has a max memory bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s, less than half, and it's the fastest processor in the market right now.

 

[playtech1]

I think RAM speed is one of those things which can be a bottleneck if you don't have enough, but if you do have sufficient speed to keep the CPU etc. fully occupied, then there's not really much benefit in increasing the speed (much the same as with RAM capacity really).

So in my experience faster RAM, outside of very specific applications or very bad RAM/CPU speed mismatches, is not a major factor in overall system performance.

 

[profcutter]

Yeah, and for the applications listed by the OP, I doubt that the higher RAM throughput would have any detectable impact whatsoever.

 

[zonai]

By the way, I was reading into this further, and Anandtech was unable to saturate the memory bandwidth on an M1 Max beyond 224GB/s using the performance cores, and 243GB/s using the efficiency cores as well. They conclude, "More importantly for the M1 Max, it’s only slightly higher than the 204GB/s limit of the M1 Pro, so from a CPU-only workload perspective, it doesn’t appear to make sense to get the Max if one is focused just on CPU bandwidth."

Apple's M1 Pro, M1 Max SoCs Investigated: New Performance and Efficiency Heights

www.anandtech.com