M4 Max MacBook Pro: Real-World Usage Tests

[MacRumors]

Apple last week replaced the M3 Max MacBook Pro with the new M4 Max MacBook Pro, and we picked up one of the new high-end MacBook Pro machines to see how it compares to the prior model with both benchmarks and real-world tests.

We tested an M4 Max with a 16-core CPU, 40-core GPU, and 48GB RAM against an M3 Max MacBook Pro with similar specs. The two machines look similar, but the display on the M4 version did get some improvements and it's a little bit brighter. There's an option for nano-texture too, which makes a big difference if you ever work outside.

Thunderbolt 5 ports instead of Thunderbolt 4 ports allow you to connect more displays (up to three 6K displays) and get faster transfer speeds. Unsurprisingly, the M4 Max performed better across the board on benchmarks, and those higher numbers did indeed translate to actual improvements in day-to-day performance.

Creating a slow motion clip from a standard clip in Topaz Labs AI took the M3 Max MacBook Pro a little over six minutes, while the M4 Max MacBook Pro was done in under five minutes.

Exporting a 6 minute 4K video with effects, plugins, LUTs, Roto AI masks, Motion VFX, and more from Final Cut Pro took the M3 Max 1:17, while the M4 Max did it in 1:07. It's only a 10 second savings, but that adds up with longer videos and over time.

Obviously you're not going to be upgrading to the M4 Max MacBook Pro if you have an M3 Max machine, but it is interesting to see the year-over-year improvements. If you have something like an M1 Pro or an M1 Max and do a lot of CPU/GPU heavy tasks, upgrading to the M4 Max could end up saving you a good amount of time.

Let us know what you think of the M4 Max MacBook Pro's performance in the comments below.

Article Link: M4 Max MacBook Pro: Real-World Usage Tests

 

[Syrianos82]

What strikes me a bit is that when the iPad m4 came out most people were leaning toward the negative side reviewing the nano texture. With the m4 MacBook Pro it seems everbody suddenly works outside or in crazy bright offices… 😂

Nobody is talking about slight fuzziness and less sharp text or lines.

What made the general opinion flip sides??

(Yes I have an iPad Pro with nano texture so speaking from personal experience)

 

[ColonelShaun]

I'm a video editor (still using an M1 iMac Happily), and more than export times, I'm always interested in hearing about how fluidly you can scrub through clips and watch timelines without rendering. The render speeds are always a nice comparison benchmark, but 10 seconds doesn't mean as much. My computer can render most things in a reasonable time. Where I see my m1 struggle is watching 4K Multicam clips with the Multicam viewer open. Or coloring footage and adding titles and playing it back without rendering first.

I'm not sure the scientific way to test that, but that data would be really helpful with a comparison. Something to think about for the future?

(And I'd love to see those comparisons for an M4 Pro Mac mini vs the M4 Max MBP. That's the dilemma I'm in.

Thanks for doing these for us!

 

[roar08]

Obviously you're not going to be upgrading to the M4 Max MacBook Pro if you have an M3 Max machine

Obvious to who? Maybe not you or me, but there may be plenty of people who see a benefit.

 

[Rychiar]

everyday the mini 4 blows me away more and more compared to the mini 2. so I can imagine what this max chip is like

 

[Normandy_sr2]

Obvious to who? Maybe not you or me, but there may be plenty of people who see a benefit.

I have extensive experience as a full-time video producer spanning several decades, and I currently use the M3 MAX. Based on my analysis, upgrading to this model does not offer a meaningful return on investment (ROI) for users who already own an M2 or M3 series, and even the M1 Max would be difficult to justify beyond mere "bragging rights." The performance gains, while present, are incremental and do not provide a substantial leap in practical video production workflows. Unless you are specifically seeking the latest hardware for prestige or minimal performance improvements, the financial outlay is not warranted. For those intent on purchasing, however, it's your prerogative.

 

[kinless]

Funny, I went from a non-retina glossy display to a retina nano display. So even if nano isn't as sharp as glossy, it's still miles better than what I had before.

Haven't put my M4 Max through its paces yet (still getting everything set up) but it's so nice to have a machine that doesn't slow to a crawl nor have the fans spin up with multiple apps and VMs all running at once.

 

[NMBob]

Shouldn't they have named it a MaxBook?

 

[MrRoberto]

Obvious to who? Maybe not you or me, but there may be plenty of people who see a benefit.

Just look up how many M3 Max MacBook Pros are being dropped on eBay every week and that should give you an idea of how many folks are upgrading from M3 Max to M4 Max.

 

[Dave-Z]

M4 Max MacBook Pro is definitely going to help me peruse the MacRumors forums faster. /s

Nice machine. I only read and write so it's too much computer for me. I'm going to wait until the M4 MacBook Airs release and decide between one of those or the base M4 MacBook Pro.

 

[Marek5069]

This was a frustrating video to watch. There are many ways to show a comparison that would be so much better than how it was done. Put the benchmarks for both machines on the screen at once. If you had the data from the M1 Max and M2 Max, instead of just saying you have that data, show it also. Would have been great to see the progression reflected. Swing and a miss.

 

[aevan]

Just look up how many M3 Max MacBook Pros are being dropped on eBay every week and that should give you an idea of how many folks are upgrading from M3 Max to M4 Max.

Yeah, I know right, it probably makes for almost a whole 1% of M3 Max owners. Crazy.

 

[star-affinity]

I'm a video editor (still using an M1 iMac Happily), and more than export times, I'm always interested in hearing about how fluidly you can scrub through clips and watch timelines without rendering. The render speeds are always a nice comparison benchmark, but 10 seconds doesn't mean as much. My computer can render most things in a reasonable time. Where I see my m1 struggle is watching 4K Multicam clips with the Multicam viewer open. Or coloring footage and adding titles and playing it back without rendering first.

I'm not sure the scientific way to test that, but that data would be really helpful with a comparison. Something to think about for the future?

(And I'd love to see those comparisons for an M4 Pro Mac mini vs the M4 Max MBP. That's the dilemma I'm in.

Thanks for doing these for us!

I saw a video on YouTube (can't find it right now) where the person scrubbed through a heavy project in DaVinci Resolve and the M4 Pro Mac mini did it better than the M1 Ultra. Now, the M1 Ultra was faster at exporting and other GPU dependent tasks, but when it comes to the scrubbing the M4 Pro sure seemed better.

 

[richinaus]

I have extensive experience as a full-time video producer spanning several decades, and I currently use the M3 MAX. Based on my analysis, upgrading to this model does not offer a meaningful return on investment (ROI) for users who already own an M2 or M3 series, and even the M1 Max would be difficult to justify beyond mere "bragging rights." The performance gains, while present, are incremental and do not provide a substantial leap in practical video production workflows. Unless you are specifically seeking the latest hardware for prestige or minimal performance improvements, the financial outlay is not warranted. For those intent on purchasing, however, it's your prerogative.

Yes I struggle to see the ROI over an M1 Max still - it used to be the case an upgrade every 2-3 years did the trick but now I see myself just waiting until the next redesign and investing then and spending money saved on other tools that will increase productivity.

 

[MysteriousStain]

For these particular tests, I am underwhelmed. I’m sure there are areas when the M4 trounces the M3

 

[Timpetus]

Whether it's worth it to you depends on how much your time spent using the machine is worth. If you are making $100/hr and you use it for the heavy workloads that make you that much for 4 hours a day, 5 days a week, then getting another 20% done in that time would be worth $400 a week, or $20,800 a year. If you don't use it for work at all, sure it's just a toy, but many people are doing heavy duty video editing or content creation with their MBPs and can justify the expense (probably $1-2k net given you are selling your old machine) quite easily.

 

[Allen_Wentz]

Whether it's worth it to you depends on how much your time spent using the machine is worth. If you are making $100/hr and you use it for the heavy workloads that make you that much for 4 hours a day, 5 days a week, then getting another 20% done in that time would be worth $400 a week, or $20,800 a year. If you don't use it for work at all, sure it's just a toy, but many people are doing heavy duty video editing or content creation with their MBPs and can justify the expense (probably $1-2k net given you are selling your old machine) quite easily.

This type of analysis, like the simplistic times listed in the article, are not what matter. Seldom does real productivity present that simplistically. What happens is that the time in milliseconds for a blur to render or whatever is just slow enough to interrupt creative thinking, while a faster box does not cause the same interruption. Or a slow box makes operations hiccup in a frustrating way, again affecting mental state/creativity.

 

[ct1211]

Apple last week replaced the M3 Max MacBook Pro with the new M4 Max MacBook Pro, and we picked up one of the new high-end MacBook Pro machines to see how it compares to the prior model with both benchmarks and real-world tests.

We tested an M4 Max with a 16-core CPU, 40-core GPU, and 48GB RAM against an M3 Max MacBook Pro with similar specs. The two machines look similar, but the display on the M4 version did get some improvements and it's a little bit brighter. There's an option for nano-texture too, which makes a big difference if you ever work outside.

Thunderbolt 5 ports instead of Thunderbolt 4 ports allow you to connect more displays (up to three 6K displays) and get faster transfer speeds. Unsurprisingly, the M4 Max performed better across the board on benchmarks, and those higher numbers did indeed translate to actual improvements in day-to-day performance.

Creating a slow motion clip from a standard clip in Topaz Labs AI took the M3 Max MacBook Pro a little over six minutes, while the M4 Max MacBook Pro was done in under five minutes.

Exporting a 6 minute 4K video with effects, plugins, LUTs, Roto AI masks, Motion VFX, and more from Final Cut Pro took the M3 Max 1:17, while the M4 Max did it in 1:07. It's only a 10 second savings, but that adds up with longer videos and over time.

Obviously you're not going to be upgrading to the M4 Max MacBook Pro if you have an M3 Max machine, but it is interesting to see the year-over-year improvements. If you have something like an M1 Pro or an M1 Max and do a lot of CPU/GPU heavy tasks, upgrading to the M4 Max could end up saving you a good amount of time.

Let us know what you think of the M4 Max MacBook Pro's performance in the comments below.

Article Link: M4 Max MacBook Pro: Real-World Usage Tests like congratulations to the engineers over in Taiwan, they outdid themselves on that chip. So much so I'll venture to guess we see Intel go down next year. But anyway, forget about that. I think I see cooks strategy here. He managed to bring out this M series, Chip, and in four years run it up to the ceiling of diminishing returns. I started thinking now why wouldn't they milk that? It can't be because they're trying to outrun Intel or anybody else's PCs. When did Apple ever give a rats patootie about being the fastest computer on the block. But then it occurred to me. This run up with the M series, Chip bought him four years of staying in that same clunky heavy form factor. (No flaming here, I'm just joking boys and girls) But anyway that's not why I'm here. Now that you boys have all done outdone yourself on speed how about you send somebody down to the local Walmart to pick up a PC any PC in fact buy the 199 special PC. Take it back to the software boys. I want them to open up that $200 PC and I want him to play around with in the file explorer system for a while. The cutting the pasting the fluidity of it all. Study it hard. and then copy it. Crap oh wait, now that I'm thinking of it, have him get a Windows 10 PC. So down at the junkie or some resale shop I don't know. Find somebody with Windows 10 at their office. Windows 11 they finally started screwing up perfection by monkeying around with things.No matter, just copy, copy Copy every last bit of it scrap whatever the heck you've been using and whatever you had in the pipeline for 10 years from now. Just use that it'll take you guys four hours to write the program for crying out loud. Let's do it boys! PS remember a Windows 10 computer not a Windows 11 if you get a Windows 11 take it to FN back go find a Windows 10 got it, great!

 

[GraXXoR]

What strikes me a bit is that when the iPad m4 came out most people were leaning toward the negative side reviewing the nano texture. With the m4 MacBook Pro it seems everbody suddenly works outside or in crazy bright offices… 😂

Nobody is talking about slight fuzziness and less sharp text or lines.

What made the general opinion flip sides??

(Yes I have an iPad Pro with nano texture so speaking from personal experience)

It’s not a general opinion, it’s a few YouTubers and influences who have purchased the M4 max with Nano coat.

The number of people that require this laptop is vanishingly small, and the number of people that require Nano coat is also likely a rather limited subset of all users.

It also drives clicks to their YouTube videos. The more controversial their opinion the better.

Remember that for many people the M4 Max is merely content for their shows. Vast majority of videos you’re watching are going to be creators who are using the computer ostensibly for their creative work and are bargaining that they’ll get more back from their content than the machine itself cost.

And then there will be a small number of people who actually do work outside on a daily basis.

 

[richinaus]

This type of analysis, like the simplistic times listed in the article, are not what matter. Seldom does real productivity present that simplistically. What happens is that the time in milliseconds for a blur to render or whatever is just slow enough to interrupt creative thinking, while a faster box does not cause the same interruption. Or a slow box makes operations hiccup in a frustrating way, again affecting mental state/creativity.

I am with you on this one however I am not really experiencing it too much on the M1 Max at present. When it starts interrupting fluidity of work is when I usually upgrade, as when I am in full flow on an ADHD hyper focus and the computer slows me down at all, it's gone. These days though it is usually poor apps rather than the hardware.

 

[Bungaree.Chubbins]

brain failure: please ignore

 

[mperkins37]

Im still on a 2012 MacPro, 128 GB RAm but I suspect that the MBP with even 32GB ram would run circles around it. Ill be looking at replacing it with a Mini, or a laptop, soon.

 

[Dr McKay]

Obvious to who? Maybe not you or me, but there may be plenty of people who see a benefit.

99% of users aren’t going to upgrade a maxed out machine each year, not even content creators. A few minutes shaved off export time is inconsequential compared to the days spent writing/planning/recording/editing.

 

[svish]

Good video. The new chips are very powerful.

 

[oliverchater]

I'm a video editor (still using an M1 iMac Happily), and more than export times, I'm always interested in hearing about how fluidly you can scrub through clips and watch timelines without rendering. The render speeds are always a nice comparison benchmark, but 10 seconds doesn't mean as much. My computer can render most things in a reasonable time. Where I see my m1 struggle is watching 4K Multicam clips with the Multicam viewer open. Or coloring footage and adding titles and playing it back without rendering first.

I'm not sure the scientific way to test that, but that data would be really helpful with a comparison. Something to think about for the future?

(And I'd love to see those comparisons for an M4 Pro Mac mini vs the M4 Max MBP. That's the dilemma I'm in.

Thanks for doing these for us!

I'm also a video editor. Realistically, that's usually a bottleneck from file sizes and media read speeds. With a good proxy workflow and fast (10gbe) NAS, I was able to edit a 9x 4k multicamera show without any lag on my old M1 Ultra Mac Studio. Colour grading definitely suffers from that bottleneck as you'll be working from the raw media rather than proxies (but only 1 clip at a time).
Hard to compare how the NLE is going to handle scrubbing through a timeline as the pipeline is crucial. Resolve and FCP are very GPU focused. Premiere was CPU and slowly shifting to GPU - After Effect is the same but still uses RAM for its previews. File format is crucial too due to intraframe vs interframe compression - many people use delivery codecs like MP4 for proxies because the file size is small, but don't realise that a MOV or DNxHD is often more effect since the software only has to look at the necessary frame and not those before/after etc...

Anyway, I have just upgraded from maxed out M1 Ultra to maxed out M4 Max - and the laptop seems to be a little better at everything I've benchmarked so far. Plus it's portable!