There is a Mac 16,1 that appears to have been benchmarked, but I'm looking at what the iPad Geekbench scores are and scaling by two for the Pro based on Apple's estimates. The M1 Ultra is about another 50% more.
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.
M4 Pro Chip Announced: Up to 14-Core CPU and 20-Core GPU, Up to 64GB of RAM, Thunderbolt 5 Support, and More
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
There is a Mac 16,1 that appears to have been benchmarked, but I'm looking at what the iPad Geekbench scores are and scaling by two for the Pro based on Apple's estimates. The M1 Ultra is about another 50% more.
The M4/M4 Pro is beautifully balanced for performance imo.
8 core M4 is 4p4e
10 core M4 is 4p6e
12 core M4 Pro is 8p4e
14 core M4 Pro is 10p4e
It really is great that there has been a focus on performance cores after the M3 configurations were a bit lame. Especially as software like Logic doesn’t use the e-cores.
8 core M4 is 4p4e
10 core M4 is 4p6e
12 core M4 Pro is 8p4e
14 core M4 Pro is 10p4e
It really is great that there has been a focus on performance cores after the M3 configurations were a bit lame. Especially as software like Logic doesn’t use the e-cores.
Last edited:
Win some lose some. At least you didn’t buy the very last Intel MacBook Air like I did.
I could kind of tell from industry situation at the time M3 was an odd release.
M4 seems like the one to get though. I’m over here giving my perfectly good M1 Pro the side eye now.
I'm pretty sure I said in these forums somewhere that I couldn't imagine the m4 pro MacBook Pro being worth the $500
I just saved buying a refurbished
still have a week to decide but depending on how pricing shakes out I may return and buy an m4 pro rather than take a price protection discount
better p/e core ratio really appeals to me
option 2 may be to take the discount, leave the laptop at work, and buy a mini for home
seems tempting but the MacBook is actually far more than I need at work other than the screen
At this point they porbably doesn't have a core count concept, they target a rough performance envelope, then optimize for die area and yield on a single wafer, adding or taking away cores as needed... anything to bring down costs.
That’s probably exactly right
They don’t know what they are going to get until it comes out
It almost like agriculture
Guess it’s a good harvest
But the non-Pro iPhone 16 continues to have only USB 2 (exactly the same as the iPhone 1 from 2007) with up to 480 Mb/s data transfer speeds, which is 240 times slower than Thunderbolt 5 (up to 120 Gb/s). So a data transfer from an iPhone 16 to a M4 Pro Mac that takes 4 hours would only take 1 minute if the iPhone 16 had Thunderbolt 5 instead of USB 2. Would you rather wait 1 minute or 4 hours? Now do you realize what a colossal scumbag Tim Cook is? See the thread in the link below for more details:
Will iPhone 14 be USB 2.0? Probably, since Cook is mediocre.
Apple computers have had USB 3.0 since mid-2012. That is 10 years ago. Despite that, Tim Cook, being the mediocre beancounter MBA suit that he is, has still not done anything to upgrade the connectivity on the latest iPhones. The latest iPhones use the same USB 2.0 connectivity that shipped with...
forums.macrumors.com
Last edited:
Virtually all of your posts are about Tim Cook being horrible. Maybe write to them instead of us if it bothers you this obsessively. Apple will never make changes due to forum feedback that isn’t related to a platform they own. You’re yelling at clouds, and not even very constructively. Just don’t buy the products that don’t perform how you want, it’s very simple.But the non-Pro iPhone 16 continues to have only USB 2 (exactly the same as the iPhone 1 from 2007) with up to 480 Mb/s data transfer speeds, with is 240 times slower than Thunderbolt 5 (up to 120 Gb/s). So a data transfer from an iPhone 16 to a M4 Pro Mac that takes 4 hours would only take 1 minute if the iPhone 16 had Thunderbolt 5 instead of USB 2. Would you rather wait 1 minute or 4 hours? Now do you realize what a colossal scumbag Tim Cook is? See the thread in the link below for more details:
Will iPhone 14 be USB 2.0? Probably, since Cook is mediocre.
Apple computers have had USB 3.0 since mid-2012. That is 10 years ago. Despite that, Tim Cook, being the mediocre beancounter MBA suit that he is, has still not done anything to upgrade the connectivity on the latest iPhones. The latest iPhones use the same USB 2.0 connectivity that shipped with...
Or, consider using the time you spend repeating how much of a ”colossal scumbag” Tim Cook is to earn some extra income for yourself to afford the products that meet those expectations. Apple has artificially segmented their product lines for at least 20+ years, this isn‘t a new thing. Upselling is part of their strategy and it clearly works, even if it is annoying. Go read some iBook threads from 2004 and how the external displays were restricted compared to Powerbooks for one example.
Mods— check the post history before you whack me for saying this, it’s crazy.
Finally gave up on waiting for a big iMac and got this and a Studio Display to replace my maxed out 2020 iMac. I'll just add the eventual Studio Display 2 down the line.
Does Cyberpunk 2077 support mods through Whisky? That and Ara: History Untold is all I still fire up the Wintendo (bootcamp) for these days.
Does Cyberpunk 2077 support mods through Whisky? That and Ara: History Untold is all I still fire up the Wintendo (bootcamp) for these days.
M4 is 4p6e, no? I would expect a pretty big step from M4 to M4Pro.
Can’t wait for benchmarks. Geekbench multicore:
M2 Ultra: 21351
M3Max: 20927
M3Pro: 15281
M2Max: 14836
Leaked M4: 15288
I think we are looking at M4Pro matching every single previous config for CPU, with Max knocking it out of the park. The step from M3Pro to M3Max, and M2Max to M2Ultra, is 2x P-cores. M4 already matches M3Pro, and the step to M4Pro is 2.5x P-cores. I don’t see why M4Pro wouldn’t beat M2Ultra.
I’m leaning towards agreeing with those saying we may never see an M4Ultra, depending on what the config for the M4Max will be.
But the non-Pro iPhone 16 continues to have only USB 2 (exactly the same as the iPhone 1 from 2007) with up to 480 Mb/s data transfer speeds, which is 240 times slower than Thunderbolt 5 (up to 120 Gb/s). So a data transfer from an iPhone 16 to a M4 Pro Mac that takes 4 hours would only take 1 minute if the iPhone 16 had Thunderbolt 5 instead of USB 2. Would you rather wait 1 minute or 4 hours? Now do you realize what a colossal scumbag Tim Cook is? See the thread in the link below for more details:
Will iPhone 14 be USB 2.0? Probably, since Cook is mediocre.
Apple computers have had USB 3.0 since mid-2012. That is 10 years ago. Despite that, Tim Cook, being the mediocre beancounter MBA suit that he is, has still not done anything to upgrade the connectivity on the latest iPhones. The latest iPhones use the same USB 2.0 connectivity that shipped with...
Sir, this is a Wendy's.
How is the iPhone 16 relevant in this thread? If you find yourself transferring data from an iPhone to an M4 Mac often enough that the duration matters to you, Apple has a solution for that, the iPhone Pro. The vast, vast majority of people will never copy data from their phones to their computers (if they even have one) via USB.
It's quite interesting that 8-core is iMac only. On top of the M4Pro option, it is quite clear that Apple has positioned Mac Mini above the iMac. Wish they had a cheaper option display than Studio display.
I think that's pretty much it — process yields were poor, so for the M3 Pro that sells a fair amount, they decided to focus more on efficiency than performance, and on the M3 Max that doesn't sell anywhere near as much anyway, they took the chance to go higher-end.
Pretty sure I haven't connected an iPhone to a computer with a USB cable since my 3GS. Might have done it with my 4S, not sure, but definitely not since. Exactly what do you want me to transfer?
Systematized binning. Maximizing resources. Supply chain stuff.
Check out Andrew tsai on YouTube. It’s really depends on which game you play. Because in the end it depends on what the game needs to run it and it can be different for each game. But in general people would just say more gpu to get better frame rates.
On his channel he often runs Baldur Gate 3 and if I remember correctly he runs ok on non pro non max m series chip but it needs 16gb at least for the third act (never played the game).
I am particularly interested in games that need to run through whisky / crossover etc, so it requires also more cpu power to run some games due to translation. Especially city building games require significant cpu and ram to run it. But sometimes there is a cap of much such approach can make use of the hardware, I believe there are diminishing returns after a while.
So I’m looking whether I can get away with an m4 pro or need a base m4 max.
Yeah maximise resources indeed. The iPad mini 7 is a good example, makes me wonder whether they actually had a lot of “faulty” a17 pro that wouldn’t be ok for the iPhone pro but could be repurposed for the iPad mini. Or it was just a business opportunity that tsmc offered a good deal to sell these rather than literally “bin” it
Sure!
Why let otherwise perfectly usable silicon (which is insanely expensive to fabricate) go to waste?
Shut off the cores in the bad spots, and bin them in their respective SKUs.