Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

M4 Pro Chip Benchmark Results Reveal an Extremely Impressive Performance Feat

Earendil said:
Can someone more knowledgeable explain how this makes sense? How does a core that’s 50% faster than another lose when testing multi core and the faster core has more cores on the chip?
Click to expand...

  • The M4 has 4 p-cores vs. the M2 Max's 8 p-cores. The M4 has 6 e-cores vs. the M2 Max's 4 e-cores, but those factor in less. It's better to look at it as "the M4's 4 p-cores perform almost as good as the M2 Max's 8 p-cores".
  • Core don't scale linearly in practice, and Geekbench 6 tries to factor in real-world scenarios. So if you have twice as many cores, it won't be twice as fast.
 
Newgoblin49 said:
I don't think you understand what @iSayuSay meant. Or maybe he wasn't too clear.

He was trying to say that imagine I drop 1000s of $ on an M3 Max , only for it to get outdone the very next year by the M4 Pro at a significantly lower cost. It doesn't make sense to buy 3000$ machine today when next year likely the 1000$ machine would beat it.
Click to expand...

Except it absolutely does. You either need that power today, or you don't.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Richtong, LogicalApex and Allen_Wentz
JHillPhD said:
Unless they're running stress tests this means nothing to be honest.
Click to expand...

That’s not necessarily true

I’ve anecdotally found performance of one of the most stressful things I do on a computer (nhl legacy on rpcs3) scales pretty well with geekbench multi core scores
 
I bought a top-end M2 Ultra to replace my Intel Mac Pro, and it's has bene and still is a great machine. Of course it sucks that a single chip is nearly as powerful (M2 still wins in GPU I believe), but my hopes for an M4 Ultra – or, fingers crossed, an M4 Extreme – fills me with excitement. The latter wild be extraordinarily powerful for 3D/CG work, which is precisely where benchmarks prove their worth.
 
  • Like
  • Love
Reactions: Richtong, Allen_Wentz and wojtek.traczyk
iSayuSay said:
It really is a bad time for M chip series. Apple keeps dwarfing the previous generation by huge margin as if the old chip means nothing. M4 Pro faster than M2 Ultra. Baseline M4 faster than M2 Pro, M4 Pro much faster than M3 Pro. I mean come on how do you think people with older M series Macs feel about that?

At this pace, next year baseline M5 chip could be faster than M4 Pro today. I do think some baby steps upgrade like NVidia GPU, or maybe iPhone A series chip feels much better for consumers as you don't feel much gutted when the next gen chip is launched.

Also the iteration update is way too fast, M3 series barely half a year old yet and M4 is already launched (on iPad Pro) and the M3 was getting punched real good. Like whoaaa, really?🤨
Click to expand...
This is either sarcasm or you’re a CEO.
 
  • Like
  • Haha
Reactions: Richtong and ddhhddhh2
hoorayforhollywood said:
Slightly off-topic but M-series related. I seem to remember around the time of the M1 launch (maybe before) people saying that any iPhone app or game should now be compatible with a Mac because of the similar/shared chip architecture. But that never really happened. Any ideas why?
Click to expand...
Wtf are you talking about? It did! Software manufacturers fast-tracked making their apps unusable by the M1 Macs. I still have SnapChat and a few others on my M1 Mac Mini.
 
skippermonkey said:
I bought a top-end M2 Ultra to replace my Intel Mac Pro, and it's has bene and still is a great machine. Of course it sucks that a single chip is nearly as powerful (M2 still wins in GPU I believe), but my hopes for an M4 Ultra – or, fingers crossed, an M4 Extreme – fills me with excitement. The latter wild be extraordinarily powerful for 3D/CG work, which is precisely where benchmarks prove their worth.
Click to expand...
The M2 Ultra still has:

  • A more powerful GPU
  • Better performance on certain tasks (see Cinebench benchmarks showing it still significantly faster than the M4 Pro)
  • Faster memory bandwidth
  • Support for more displays
  • Faster Neural Engine (adjusting for the M2 series being rated for TOPS in INT16 vs the INT8 for the M4 series).
 
  • Like
Reactions: Netrox, Allen_Wentz and skippermonkey
Insane!
Feels like yesterday when my M1 Ultra was the best of the best!

I'm trying to work enough to afford an M4 Ultra, later next year.
 
Return Zero said:
The base model is the value king for sure. Maybe the best value Mac of all time especially at the edu price of 499.

The mini pro seems to compete with the studio ultra on CPU benchmarks, but making the comparison fair requires maxing it to 64GB, 1TB, and gig Ethernet which takes it to $2500. Even then, you still have the differences in GPU, ports, and a few others. The base mini is absolutely the one I would (and likely will) get!

For those that actually need this much performance, best to wait a bit longer… a base M4 max studio will undoubtedly be a better performance value than a tricked out mini, if they keep the same pricing structure (which they have with the other models)… assuming they don’t discontinue it or something, haha.
Click to expand...

The base configuration of each model is always the better value. If you need to upgrade more than one option, then its usually better to just get the next model up.

However, the M4 Max isn’t going to be much more performant (CPU-wise) than the M4 Pro, it only has 2 extra p-cores.
 
JosephAW said:
Glad to see Apple is not sitting on new hardware technology for a few years and slowly trickling it out but instead rolling it out as soon as it’s available putting it in all their hardware.
Some of us grew up under the days where every year all we would get is a small bump in megahertz but it was still the same chip for years. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...
Hello there 2012-2015 15” MacBook Pro, thanks Intel Broadwell/Skylake fiasco.
 
  • Like
Reactions: UpsideDownEclair and JosephAW
obviouslogic said:
The base configuration of each model is always the better value. If you need to upgrade more than one option, then its usually better to just get the next model up.

However, the M4 Max isn’t going to be much more performant (CPU-wise) than the M4 Pro, it only has 2 extra p-cores.
Click to expand...
True. It will really only be worth it for those who need max RAM configs or max GPU cores.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Richtong and chetzar
M4 might be the one that gets me to upgrade finally. I really wanna see the results for After Effects first. The ole 2017 MBP is starting to show its age lol.
 
BreuerEditor said:
So this makes my maxed out 2019 27” iMac look like PowerPC processor with the advancements. Incredibly impressive indeed that a Mini can outperform a Studio just 2 years later.
Click to expand...
Helps that the studio isn’t updated that often, but to each their own, the M4 Pro looks like an awesome upgrade.
 
chucker23n1 said:
Sure, but the mini will even have Thunderbolt 5, if that strikes your fancy. It'll also still be $1,500 less. (But yes, overall fewer ports, though this doesn't matter that much on a desktop. Just have a dock nearby. For example, IMHO, HDMI is useful on the MacBook Pro to avert embarassing "I'm trying to present something at a client's, but they only have HDMI, and I don't have an adapter" situations. But on a desktop, you either need HDMI, in which case you'll have an adapter/dock/hub, or you don't.)



Yep.

Although I suspect the Studio won't be coming for about half a year. Perhaps at WWDC, which is eight months out. But once it does get released, we'll probably be back to the situation where there's a nice gradient from mini (M4, M4 Pro) to Studio (M4 Max, M4 Ultra), at probably similar price points $599, $1,399, $1,999, $3,999.

So if you need a desktop Mac with decent mid-range performance soon? Get the mini.
Click to expand...
Yeah TB5 or ray tracing could certainly make the difference for some folks. If the thing doesn't thermal throttle at all, it'll be a heck of a workstation and definitely the one to buy now. I wish I had an excuse to spec one up :D
 
  • Like
Reactions: QuarterSwede and chucker23n1
I will wait for the teardown on Nov 8-10 but it seems like i will upgrade from my m1 to m4

Untitled.jpg
 
chucker23n1 said:
An M4 Max probably still wouldn't beat the Threadripper; even if we assume linear scaling (which we can't for multiple reasons²), the best-case score would be "only" 26,447.
Click to expand...

With three M4 Max results in, let's repeat that exercise:

Single-coreMulti-core% better (single)% better (multi)
AMD Ryzen 9 9950X34202206517.3%19.9%
Intel Core Ultra 285K32392244223.9%17.8%
AMD Threadripper PRO 7995WX29032794138.2%-5.4%
Apple M4 Pro3925226692.2%16.7%
Apple M4 Max401326445

(26,445 is oddly close to my extrapolation of 26,447. 🤣)
 
Newgoblin49 said:
@iSayuSay Don't be discouraged listening to what others have to say , your reasoning is sound enough.

The perspective of the rest over here is that Apple should always push the bleeding edge regardless, which is also right in their own way. But as a consumer that means your devices net worth reduces at an exponential rate.

Spending 4,000$ on a Machine for it to be worth less than 1000$ in 2 years or so is ridiculous
Click to expand...

consumer goods aren't meant to be investment vehicles

it doesn't matter what it's worth in two years, what matters is how many years of use you get out if it for the $4000
 
  • Like
  • Love
Reactions: QuarterSwede and Chuckeee
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back