Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
M4 - For everyday people to surf the Web, answer emails, Social Media and Light Graphic/Video work
M4 Pro - For most Graphic, Video Work, Coding and other professional work where time is money.
M4 Max - If your workflow needs the most power possible in particular GPU cores.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ReneeReader
doesn't look like you can get 64GB memory on the M4 Pro, tops out at 48

You can on the mini.

You can on Mac Mini :)

I'm so pissed about this. What's even more absurd is that you can't even get more than 36GB of RAM on the binned M4 Max either. Apple is forcing us to buy the higher-end M4 Max to get 64GB+ of RAM. It doesn't make any sense. I held out for an M4 Pro only to deal with this nonsense.

Screenshot 2024-10-31 at 17.42.25.png
 
  • Like
  • Sad
Reactions: sinsin and Armada2
Dude, I did, but when using an M1 max, nothing is really demanding; it's a beast. But I am trying to find out what is enough for the coming years. I can and will run Activity Monitor, but that does not show how many GPU cores are running and how many e-cores or p-cores are in use at the same time. If that is not known, how can I make a good choice?
Apple Silicon has a unified architecture for processing through Metal. Metal allows apps direct access to compute hardware in a Unified way because GPU cores are now integrated into the same die as CPU cores. Traditional/older separate GPU monitoring doesn't apply. You are getting overall (unified) processor (and memory) usage in the stats which is what matters when it comes to memory and processing on Apple Silicon, with unified hardware architectures you also get a unified picture of usage. Others may explain it better, but hope that helps.

(iStat Menus does show core utilization better than Activity Monitor.)
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: ReneeReader
Meh who cares about all your boring workflows, I want to know how much better….is it $2000 better....the 40 core max is vs the 20 core pro for cyberpunk, Baldurs gate, and other games!
 
The one thing I haven't seen mentioned is the number of (external) displays that can be supported.

I currently have an MBP M2Pro, not because I'm running any demanding apps but because I wanted to have two external displays and at the time an M2Pro was the entry point. Now an MBP M4 would be adequate for my needs. (Even an MB Air, possibly.)

However, I've acquired an additional screen, but the only way to use it is an M4Max, way overkill for the work I do. I'd get an M4 Mac mini, but I sometimes need to go mobile.

First world problems...
 
  • Like
Reactions: ReneeReader
I am just a photographer. Sometimes, I open 150 raw files in Photoshop and edit them one after the other. Use Lightroom for image editing and exports. I also use 4k 60fps Canon R5 video files for shot videos and have to edit and export them. Typically when I edit video's I do not do anything with photoshop or lightroom they are separate workflows. But I do not know if they are CPU intensive or GPU intensive, if they need a lot of unified memory, or just a little bit. It's not that clear.

Dude, I did, but when using an M1 max, nothing is really demanding; it's a beast. But I am trying to find out what is enough for the coming years. I can and will run Activity Monitor, but that does not show how many GPU cores are running and how many e-cores or p-cores are in use at the same time. If that is not known, how can I make a good choice?
Your workflow is definitely a pro not a max. You can fit 100 RAW files in 48GB RAM. And for photos there is not much multi picture processing so it would only need to load a few at a time.

Activity manager has extra windows that will show you per core and GPU usage. Memory usage is in the other tab.

As for future proofing, you should only do it reasonably if you anticipate the need in the near future. Otherwise it is always cheaper to buy it when you have the need.

Save your money and invest else where.
 
I'm so pissed about this. What's even more absurd is that you can't even get more than 36GB of RAM on the binned M4 Max either. Apple is forcing us to buy the higher-end M4 Max to get 64GB+ of RAM. It doesn't make any sense. I held out for an M4 Pro only to deal with this nonsense.

View attachment 2445085

I'm so pissed about this. What's even more absurd is that you can't even get more than 36GB of RAM on the binned M4 Max either. Apple is forcing us to buy the higher-end M4 Max to get 64GB+ of RAM. It doesn't make any sense. I held out for an M4 Pro only to deal with this nonsense.

View attachment 2445085
Yes, I'm also skipping this MBP update because of this nonsense.

On top of ridiculously high prices for memory and storage upgrades, now the availability of choices, trying to push yourself to the most expensive model.

I need 64GB of memory for After Effects work and not necessarily the most expensive MAX processor. I will continue working on my refurbished binned M1 Max with 64GB!
 
Your workflow is definitely a pro not a max. You can fit 100 RAW files in 48GB RAM. And for photos there is not much multi picture processing so it would only need to load a few at a time.

Activity manager has extra windows that will show you per core and GPU usage. Memory usage is in the other tab.

As for future proofing, you should only do it reasonably if you anticipate the need in the near future. Otherwise it is always cheaper to buy it when you have the need.

Save your money and invest else where.
But would you choose the 10, 12, or 14-core CPU with a minimum of 48 GB memory or maybe more? In the past, it was easy, but now there are so many options.
 
I am just a photographer. Sometimes, I open 150 raw files in Photoshop and edit them one after the other. Use Lightroom for image editing and exports. I also use 4k 60fps Canon R5 video files for shot videos and have to edit and export them. Typically when I edit video's I do not do anything with photoshop or lightroom they are separate workflows. But I do not know if they are CPU intensive or GPU intensive, if they need a lot of unified memory, or just a little bit. It's not that clear.
Look for Art
Is Right YOu tube professional photographer M testing videos.
 
According to this video:

MBP M4 and M4 Pro can do 2 external displays
MBP M4 Max can do 3 external displays
 
  • Like
Reactions: ReneeReader
But would you choose the 10, 12, or 14-core CPU with a minimum of 48 GB memory or maybe more? In the past, it was easy, but now there are so many options.
I really would not worry too much about exact core count. You'll probably want a Pro, so it is either 12 or 14. Either one would be fine, honestly. But a 20% step up in GPU core count is not bad. I would probably go for it if money is not very constrained.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ReneeReader
What I miss is a use case. I really do not know how GPU and CPU-intensive Photoshop, Lightroom, Camera Raw, etc., is, or when the 20 GPU cores more between the Pro and Max make a difference for Premiere Pro or any other video editing tool. I use an M1 Max in a MacBook Pro for photo and video editing. This could be an M4 Pro with lots of memory, but when would I need a Max?
Because there are different choices now, I have no clue.
While this might seem off-topic to your question, it comes aroud to where I can give you my suggestion based on my actual current use projected into the latest M4 specs, plus a little past experience with some programs that you mentioned.

Here's a comparison that actually sheds a little light on actual use cases with a couple of programs that, while not exactly late-model Intel chips, shows the graphics improvements in the M series architecture.

1: Daz Studio: (CGI Modeling and rendering) M series wins hands-down. Previous testing with then-current Win 10 machines (Same or better specs) vs the then-new Intel late 2015 iMac 17 inch 5K showed a small advantage on Apple - about 10% - for identical work. Enter the M2Max Studio that I replaced the iMac with .... render times decreased 60%, and it no longer redlines the fans.

2: Affinity Photo (Think Photoshop, but not as much of a resource hog!) on the 4 core I-7 iMac with 48 GB, you opened it and waited almost a minute to get it fully loaded. M2-96GB opens with no issues, just normal splash screen time. I have yet to see a beachball loading graphics files, and I commonly work with some pretty big ones.

3: Graphic (Autocad Light, basically - same thing, not as much of a resource hog,): This one really stresses a system, as I commonly am working on architectural drawings with lots of layers. The M2 Max takes the drawings in stride, whereas before I could grab a drink while waiting for the drawings to load in a few cases.

4: Logic (Talk about a demanding program!) While I do hobby work, one of my friends is actually a sound engineer, so I'll give his experience. He bought one of the final Intel Mac Pros, decked out pretty heavily. Some of his projects were so large that he would still choke the system with them. Switched to a maxed-out M2 Studio, and he has yet to discover the limit on tracks and plugins.

5: Sims4 (animated output on steroids!) This one shocked me ... in all the years I've played, PC or MAC, no matter how much I built up the system, I would have to turn down options to get acceptable framerates. Put it on the M2 Max, and it runs like a scared rabbit with every possible setting maxed out.

Now, for my opinion on your software use questions. I went to Affinity because of how resource intensive Adobe products can be. Their graphics products will use every bit of CPU, GPU, and memory that you give them; that's not knocking them, it's a common thing for pro-level programs. If you think your M1 is fast, the M4 Max will run circles around it - just the bump in memory bandwidth alone will make a huge difference, and then once loaded it will be smoother and even more responsive - especially on things using lots of layers and effects.

Video editing? Same basic thing - the faster the memory, the more cores that you have, the higher the framerate and the higher the resolution that you can achieve. With what I've seen, unless you are running a movie studio you could easily get away with a M4 Max and run it until there are no more OS updates for it with no issues. If you have fairly large movies, use a Mac Mini or wait for the M4 Studio - the extra available ram in the desktops might be necessary down the line. The MacBook Pro will handle a lot, but there's a slight edge being given to the Mini at the moment.

Your ultimate goal with most programs at the level that you are using them is to keep the machine from using swap space on your internal drive to supplement the system memory. Swapping, even as efficiently as the M series does it, can and does cause glitches in video, audio, and CGI. In some cases (Logic and Daz are good examples), it can totally corrupt the output file to the point of not being recoverable. The Max not only gives you the options to configure it to handle that kind of workload, but it also gives you Thunderbolt 5, which will bring external drive interfaces to near-internal speeds if you have them in a TB-5 enclosure. That gives you the option to work with external files, reducing the need for the upper end sizes of internal storage (Personally, I still go with a 2 TB internal - just to give breathing room for apps that refuse to use data files or plugins from an external source. Check your apps, and allow at least double what they are taking up!)

With the Max having double the encode engines for video (2 in Max, 1 in M4 and M4 Pro) plus the highest memory speed, it gives you a system that will easily be able to meet your needs for a long time.
 
M4 is basically enough….. going to m4 pro has already broken the cost to benefit ratio.

Even worse when you get a base m4 MacBook Pro which ain’t worth the money.

I would advice getting the Mac mini m4 base, and it will last you until the next m5/m6/m7 chip, and you will thank me for this decision….
 
Would the M4 Pro MacBook Pro make a noticeable difference in handling large Excel files compared to my current M2 MacBook Air? I often get beachballs with Excel files, but I suspect that the issue may lie with Excel rather than the M2 chip.

My current M2 MacBook Air has 24GB of RAM, and I would also get 24GB of RAM with the M4 Pro.
FTFY: "large Excel files" you mean "Any Excel File". Sometimes I double click on an excel file and by the time it opens I forgot why I opened it. I have a 2019 Intel MBP.
 
FTFY: "large Excel files" you mean "Any Excel File". Sometimes I double click on an excel file and by the time it opens I forgot why I opened it. I have a 2019 Intel MBP.
Opening Excel files is not really a problem, at least not for me. But whenever I have multiple files open, formulas start being a problem.

But I'm unsure if the CPU is the problem, or more so, Excel in itself is the problem, no matter the amount of resources you have.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.