No it wont. It will have its advantage with gpu/video/high ram usage scenarios. And they will be even faster than what we are seeing with the Mini once they get M4 treatment.
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 Benchmark Results Reveal an Extremely Impressive Performance Feat
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
What I would really like to hear is:
What is the transistor count for the M4 <null>, Pro, and Max?
The M3 Pro was a really odd duck, but a closer to the M3 than the M3 Max.
It is a nice surprise that the M4 Pro seems to have reversed that, so I would suspect its transistor count is notable up too.
What is the transistor count for the M4 <null>, Pro, and Max?
The M3 Pro was a really odd duck, but a closer to the M3 than the M3 Max.
It is a nice surprise that the M4 Pro seems to have reversed that, so I would suspect its transistor count is notable up too.
I've never understood why macrumors forums are so worried about confusion vs just Apple pushing good products.
Apple, please make good products, at good value, at lots of price points. The customers with fixed budgets will figure it out and be happier.
At least 3090 isn’t suddenly getting dwarfed by 4070 which was my point in comparison to Mac. Meaning GPU development could be closing to its peak or it needs more competition.
I’d rather have slow boring and predictable iteration as it means I can count on how many gens before I upgrade.
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.
And your concern is what? That $4000 "dream setup" is still just as functional as the day before.
Seems like a case of people buying these "dream setups" for a d*ck-measuring contest are pissed that their $4000 investment is bested by a lowly $599 mini.
This is just telling me that a base M4 is more than enough for my needs; and I was all ready to buy in on a pro model.
This.
People who do real work don't get into this Geekbench circlejerk every release cycle. Mac Studio still packs much more GPU grunt and thermal headroom needed for sustained pro workflows.
Well yes, we’re human after all with emotions and perceptions. I want my $4K to last me a while before something faster is coming my way.
Why do you think people buy an expensive gaming GPU? To last them a while playing games at highest settings and resolutions so you don’t have to tweak and compromise.
Would you buy a Ferrari knowing that next year a new Honda could outpaces it?
Last edited:
I don't understand this take.
This year's Pro is good
The M3 Pro is the outlier odd duck here.
Impressive performance with the new chip. Waiting to see the results with M4 Max chip.
I’m not a big Apple eco system guy. The Mac mini is basically a full computer in a little box? The M4 max should handle gaming pretty well, correct?
We dont have to imagine, for a long long time, computer perfomance doubled every 18 months like clock work. Like that was actually the industry standard until like 2010.
I agree with you that, if you can buying at launch for a mac product tends to be best. But ultimately, you should buy the machine you need when you need it. If you can squeeze out 3 months on the old one, that's great but suggests you probably didnt need to upgrade any eariler.
I dont know what products you are talking about, but they are not obsoleting products in 12 months. Sometimes they make a big jump within 12 months, but that doesnt mean what they sold didnt do what they said it would. Some people would have needed the product during that 12 months, they shouldnt just wait, because it was more significant next time round.
I dont like this take, increase core counts is a bad way to improve performance generally. While software is better at using multiple cores, most of them dont do it evenly and dont necessarily benefit from endless amounts of new cores. Very much diminishing returns. Its a solid upgrade in the m4 cores, and m1 and m2 used to have same number of CPU cores as Max.
The max is not worse just because the pro is better. ALthough i do wish apple didnt have the binned model max, and instead lowered the non-binned max price.
That's because intel is way underperforming all their larger clients like Apple are leaving because they wasted their industry dominate position by not improving fast enough. They literally messed up it up by years of incremental improvements.
So you'd rather Apple released a slower machine today, so people who bought one 6 months or a year ago dont feel bad about their purchase?
Should they not have moved to Apple silicon then.
Honestly, everyone likes the nice new shiney. And you got that experience when you bought your model. If you cant handle the improvements with the new release, then maybe be more like a regular person and only check in on this stuff when you need to upgrade.
Honestly, if you need the kind of performance improvement where you would ever actually consider an upgrade within 12 months, then you should be celebrating the leaps.
This is also based on a pretty false narrative about the M2 Ultra anyway, which is a very different machine in so many ways, the cpu performance in a single benchmark is not really determinative of much. The GPU cores and extra media engines are likely a much bigger deal for people who bought that model. Along with IO and much larger ram capacities.
I'm sure, and i've seen on here, plenty of people foaming at the mouth for an m4 Ultra, but so many are annoyed by the wait that you are pushing as a good thing! Skipping one generation, or even delaying a generational release annoys people more than, people upset their previous flagship machine is no longer the flagship.
Sounds sweet.
Buy the Honda.
This seems all upside to me.
Means this is a bad time to buy that Ferarri. Would be cheaper just to keep getting the newest Honda every year, which exactly is my point from the first 😉
That isn't enough detail.
The M4 <null> is fine general computing device, and now with 16 GB of RAM it will be quite good at performing those tasks.
Everything above that depends on your specific use cases.
The M4 Max GPUs are probably as good at gaming as the RTX 3060... That's great for some people. but mid-tier for others.
The main challenge with games will be software availability, not performance.
Yes its pretty much a full computer in a little box.
M4 max, which is not in the mini, will be pretty good for gaming on a mac. But 'on a mac' is a massive caveat because emulating or simulating windows /x86 environments and frameworks (e.g. DirectX) takes a massive performance hit. So yeah, some older gaming, specific games that get native ports (i.e. Civ 7), maybe WOW you could have a great time on the mac. If you are expecting to be on Steam and enjoying a large number of games you will be very disappointed.
For the time being, if you dont need the GPUs otherwise, you'd be much better off investing the cash difference from an m4/m4 pro down from the max into a dedicated gaming machine. Console or steam deck would probably give you best bang for your buck.
It is always a bad time to buy a Ferarri.
Buying a Ferarri is generally silly.
If you want to buy a Ferarri, you be you. Be happy about your own decisions.
If others can wait for a few years and buy as good a Honda, those people can be happy too.
Nobody is here to make Ferarri buyers feel better. They can spend their money or not.
If someone needs computers for work, and that work will pay for that extra performance, that is fine.
If people are buying $4000 computer for kicks, this is just normal.
That’s a you problem though.
If you want to be able to flex that you have the “best” all the time then you have to pay to play.
That’s a silly thing to chase in tech though. You’ll end up sad and broke…
Right now you’re looking silly complaining that Apple is delivering too well.
It is always a bad time to buy a Ferarri.
Buying a Ferarri is generally silly.
If you want to buy a Ferarri, you be you. Be happy about your own decisions.
If others can wait for a few years and buy as good a Honda, those people can be happy too.
Nobody is here to make Ferarri buyers feel better. They can spend their money or not.
If someone needs computers for work, and that work will pay for that extra performance, that is fine.
If people are buying $4000 computer for kicks, this is just normal.
Not always. Getting an RTX 4090 is a solid tech purchase. It’s been the fastest GPU in the planet for 2 years now. You can play and render with very little compromise.
Even if 5090 is coming next year, it WILL BE a faster GPU. But I’m sure I don’t want to feel gutted by the fact that a 5060 is so much cheaper and faster.
Given the chance you’re able to buy the best tech stuff, wouldn’t you want that to last being the best for a little more while? I would 🤷🏻♂️
But its not about buying the best, you are buying a certain level of performance not a claim to having the best.
It's sad, not good that we have so little competition in high end PC GPUs. The NVIDIA pricing is well out of hand.
The fact that the 4090 isnt really surpassed, doesnt mean new games pushing the limits run better. It doesnt give you more frames or stability, it just means you know you cant do better. I'd rather people who want to spend to have the best frame rate possible today can, but also people can buy something affordable that plays today games well 12 months from now. That is to say, who cares if 4090 is the best if it could only run (a fictional) The Witcher 4 at 15 fps, it would just be damning not reassuring.
No, I don't understand at all.
"Best" feels like a marketing illusion that doesn't actually exist; or if it does, it is ephemeral and instantly fades away.
At any price point there is "best today", but tomorrow might be different.
Computers get what you bought them to get done, or not.
Personally, I cannot grok anyone buying a 4090 or 5090. It is spending money to make a game prettier, but it is rarely changing the game play which has to be designed for reasonably priced GPUs.
I would absolutely prefer to live in a world where every year a $500 computer beats last year's $5000 computer. That sounds like paradise.
I don't think I've even paid for an Apple Store BTO upgrade in the last 15 years. Give me efficient performance and capability per dollar and I'm happy.