Mac Studio being obsoleted by new Mac Pro?!

[StoneJack]

Its not a huge overlap. You're comparing the TOP mini to the BOTTOM Studio. And yes Apple has done this before with niche products. Over the last 20 years there have been various overlaps in products as they release things at different times. It makes more business sense to not spend the ROI on a niche product that sells 1% of all Mac sales.

Another addition: Apple is behind on their silicon roadmap. The pandemic I think set them back by a year or more. We should be on to M3 at this point: Fall 2020 = M1 | Fall 2021 = M2 | Fall 2022 = M3 - I think M3 is closer than people realize. M2 is just a stopgap generation. It's nothing revolutionary compared to M1. I think a Mac Studio with M3 Ultra is closer than people realize.

EDIT: also GPU benchmarks are coming in, and based on this one (which I know is just one data point so time will tell) it seems the M1 Max GPU is better than the M2 Pro GPU:

• M1 Max: 64,708
• M2 Pro: 52,691

I don't think this is the right timeline. Computer chips are not iPhone chips and require more RD effort. So, 18 months is more appropriate schedule. In addition, there have been logistical problems and production delays. Based on 18 month timeline, we are moving fully into M3 territory by spring 2023.

 

[Pressure]

M1 Max = 24-core base or 32-core full-die

M2 Pro = 16-core base or 19-core full-die

The link clearly states 19-core GPU for the M2 Pro. The M1 Max 32-core gets around 64000.

The M2 Max 38-core GPU gets nearly 87000 in the same test and the M1 Ultra 64-core GPU only hits around 94000.

 

[Jorbanead]

PCIe slots...



M-series SoCs actually look to be on an 18-month refresh cycle...?



But which GPUs...?

M1 Max = 24-core base or 32-core full-die

M2 Pro = 16-core base or 19-core full-die

PCIe slots aren’t enough to justify a Mac Pro IMO.

Yes I know what they currently are doing with M-series. You completely missed my point. My point is that Apple has continually updated their A-series every year. My hypothesis is they want the baseline M-series chips (M1, M2, M3) to follow that annual cadence as the A-series and M-series use the same cores and design.

What they currently have been doing is irrelevant because they have been dealing with chip shortages, component shortages, and shipping issues which has set back many products. We know almost for certain that the MacBook Pro’s that just came out were supposed to come in the Fall. And that’s just one launch window. We don’t know how many products have been delayed internally.

Click on the link in that post Boil. It says right there.

 

[Jorbanead]

I don't think this is the right timeline. Computer chips are not iPhone chips and require more RD effort.

The M1 chips use the exact same cores and basic design as the A-series. According to a well known chip designer that used to frequent these forums often, they are very very similar and wouldn’t require a lot of work. The Pro/Max/Ultra chips require a bit more work, but the main RnD comes from those baseline A-series chips.

They most definitely could do annual updates of their baseline M-series.

 

[StoneJack]

PCIe slots aren’t enough to justify a Mac Pro IMO.

Yes I know what they currently are doing with M-series. You completely missed my point. My point is that Apple has continually updated their A-series every year. My hypothesis is they want the baseline M-series chips (M1, M2, M3) to follow that annual cadence as the A-series and M-series use the same cores and design.

What they currently have been doing is irrelevant because they have been dealing with chip shortages, component shortages, and shipping issues which has set back many products. We know almost for certain that the MacBook Pro’s that just came out were supposed to come in the Fall. And that’s just one launch window. We don’t know how many products have been delayed internally.

Click on the link in that post Boil. It says right there.

well, you don't have evidence to backup your hypothesis, so far it is far from annual.

 

[StoneJack]

The M1 chips use the exact same cores and basic design as the A-series. According to a well known chip designer that used to frequent these forums often, they are very very similar and wouldn’t require a lot of work. The Pro/Max/Ultra chips require a bit more work, but the main RnD comes from those baseline A-series chips.

They most definitely could do annual updates of their baseline M-series.

being able to do and willing to do are different things. There are business considerations, logistics, production delays and even order delays with months of waiting.

 

[Jorbanead]

well, you don't have evidence to backup your hypothesis, so far it is far from annual.

So far we have have had an unprecedented pandemic, worldwide chip shortages, display shortages, shipping issues, production issues, lockdowns, and more. What we can almost positively assume is that nothing has exactly gone to plan these last 3 years. The MacBook Pro is evidence of that.

What we can also do is look at what Apple has done in the past - before the pandemic. Annual updates was common for most popular apple products, including products apple made chips for.

 

[Pezimak]

Apple will be right to cease development of Studio and concentrate on Mac Pro. These are generally overlapping products and Mac Pro will be priced higher than Studio (read bring in higher margins), so the decision is very clear. Studio will not be updated (just as iMac Pro) and will be supported for 10 years or so, but no new Studio will come. Instead, a monster new Mac Pro with ultra M3 chip, Wifi 6E, Bluetooth 5.3 will come, priced accordingly. That may actually reuse Studio's form or have a completely new form (I think latter) and will be very productive and pricey. Apple will want Studio users to move to new Mac Pro.

The only way a Mac Pro could bring in higher margins is if it sells as many as the Mac Studio, but it won’t. A 5 or 6 grand computer is a very niche product. A 2 grand one is much closer to Apples other pricing on its computers. Your logic is completely flawed, it misses the fact other cheaper Macs will be updated and will far supersede the Studio with an M1 chip over time, yet you believe the M1 Studio will be around on sale for 10 years?
iMac Pro was built to try and ease the flood of users ditching Mac for Windows due to the Trash Can Mac Pro. I believe a fair few didn’t stop leaving.
The Studio is a new machine and new line designed for that Max chip from their laptops in a desktop, and the Ultra as a nice bonus to that. It is going to receive updates like the other Macs.

 

[loby]

My take it might not be that the mac studio is obsolete, but the market might not support a new mac studio. Take me for example, I plan on using my Mac Studio Max for a long time and have no plans on buying a studio 2.0. I would guess there are many who think the same way.

We have to remember that the Mac Studio replaced the 27" IMac. Since that is gone, Mac Studio is designed to fill that gap (along with an Apple Studio Display). I would assume that it will be around for some time since Apple has no plans on releasing another larger imac in the near future (though rumors say different).

I for one would like to pick up the next Mac Studio when they upgrade it to M3. I do not think it will get a M2 refresh given that Mac Pro should come out in June. We will see...

 

[maflynn]

We have to remember that the Mac Studio replaced the 27" IMac.

Maybe the iMac Pro as well

 

[StoneJack]

Maybe the iMac Pro as well

yep. Absolutely true. iMac Pro also was the temporary project and has been discontinued.

 

[Pezimak]

Maybe the iMac Pro as well

I think so, I mean what are Apple waiting for to make a bigger iMac? They have the screens, the design, and the chips already. But still they haven't launched one.
I think that's also why they've put the Pro chip in the Mini. One iMac only, all other desktops are now headless boxes. If they offered the Pro chip in the 24" iMac it would be brilliant.

 

[tstafford]

Maybe the iMac Pro as well

Yeah. With the release of the Mini Pro, I'm starting to think the 27" iMac isn't coming (nor the Pro). Looks like Apple wants you to pair the ASD with your Mini or Studio of choice. Not a bad solution other than it's more expensive esp. if you need keyboard/mouse/trackpad.

 

[Elwe]

Apple will be right to cease development of Studio and concentrate on Mac Pro. These are generally overlapping products and Mac Pro will be priced higher than Studio (read bring in higher margins), so the decision is very clear. Studio will not be updated (just as iMac Pro) and will be supported for 10 years or so, but no new Studio will come. Instead, a monster new Mac Pro with ultra M3 chip, Wifi 6E, Bluetooth 5.3 will come, priced accordingly. That may actually reuse Studio's form or have a completely new form (I think latter) and will be very productive and pricey. Apple will want Studio users to move to new Mac Pro.

I think I mostly agree. The only thing I made observe is that if the Mac Mini with M2 Pro is the top SKU of that model, I would think that means the Mac Pro has to have three main (non binned) SKUs . . . M3 Max, M3 Ultra, and M3 Extreme, or whatever they choose to call it, assuming they can make it work. i guess or would be 48 cpu cores and 384GB ram. There is for sure a need for that much cpu and RAM in the market, at the very top. I don’t think they can eliminate the Intel Mac Pro without it such.

 

[loby]

I think I mostly agree. The only thing I made observe is that if the Mac Mini with M2 Pro is the top SKU of that model, I would think that means the Mac Pro has to have three main (non binned) SKUs . . . M3 Max, M3 Ultra, and M3 Extreme, or whatever they choose to call it, assuming they can make it work. i guess or would be 48 cpu cores and 384GB ram. There is for sure a need for that much cpu and RAM in the market, at the very top. I don’t think they can eliminate the Intel Mac Pro without it such.

Most of us are just arm chair predictors but moving customers from the Studio to a Mac Pro is just too early since Mac Studio came out not even a year ago to date.

The Mac Studio hits a sweet spot in-between the mini and the Pro. I have not heard about the numbers on Mac Studio, but it looks like it was popular and a good sell, so I do not see Apple discontinuing it for some time.

What "might" be something of a strategy is to upgrade the Mac Studio with the M2 eventually but not now (maybe after Mac Pro is out for awhile) and the Mac Pro gets M3 or above. That would make a clear distinction between the Mac Studio and the Pro and help those figure out the "why's" in buying. I want the Mac Studio to get a M3, but from a selling point, if you are launching the Mac Pro, you want people instead to speed the money and go for the M3 Mac Pro instead since it is a new launch and keep the Mac Studio M1 for now...

Power users and professionals who need the RAW power will always get the Mac Pro (and can afford it). I suspect this new Mac Pro will be more of a "Professional" or "Corporate" catch and crazy expensive. Of course Mac "anything" customers will buy, but this time around I think the mini satisfies the base buyer (and a little plus); the Mac Studio satisfies the non Mac Pro people, who need more than a mini pro (and/or budget conscious) and those who are crying that there is no large iMac.

I have a M1 mini and a M1 16" MacBook Pro. The BEST two computers I have evert had in my long history. "Want" a Mac Studio (have Mac Pro 2013)...so currently not a need, but will probably have the time to save up for the next Mac Studio update to buy. I really would like a Mini Pro, but will instead go for a Mac Studio when when it is updated.

Look forward to what is to come...

 

[jimthing]

Studio is here to stay, as each desktop/laptop line has it's own named chip, and price point, now with very tight price cross-overs:

Price cross-overs​

(in US$, k = thousands – as Apple set prices in US currency, then convert to others at prevailing exchange rate)

DESKTOPS:
0.5 - 1.9 k - Mini (Standard)        <== 500: students price/600: everyone else
1.3 - 4.5 k - Mini (Pro)
2 - 5   k - Studio (Max)
4 - 8   k - Studio (Ultra)
7 - 15   k - Pro (Ultra Duo? Extreme Duo?)    <==guesstimate, as unknown
12 - 60  k - Pro (Ultra Quad? Extreme Quad?)   <==guesstimate, as unknown

LAPTOPS:
[1 - 2   k - MBA (Standard)]     <==13.3", previous generation
1.2 - 2.5  k - MBA (Standard)
[1.3 - 2.5 k - MBP (Standard)]     <==13", previous generation
2 - 5.3   k - MBP (Pro)
2.9 - 6.5  k - MBP (Max)

 

[atonaldenim]

M2 Ultra will debut in a new Mac Pro before WWDC, or at WWDC at the latest. See recent leaks/rumors about it being readied along with macOS 13.3. 13.2 is now released so 13.3 will be coming soon… when the first developer betas for 13.3 are released in the next few weeks, perhaps we’ll get some more Mac Pro clues…

Mac Studio will remain in the lineup, maybe with M1 Max / Ultra for a while. That way the Mac Pro will be the clear top performer when it debuts, thanks to being the only M2 Ultra model available, plus some other cool expansion features in the big 2019 case design. Depending on yields maybe Mac Studio will get M2 Max / Ultra later this year with a press release speed bump, but not as high a priority for refresh as the bread-and-butter Macbook Pro and the overdue Mac Pro.

After Mac Pro the next big product to announce will be the VR headset, if rumors are to be believed. Once that’s been unveiled, a Mac Studio refresh rises higher on the todo list, perhaps behind an M2 iMac. But Mac Studio looks likely to remain in the lineup in between the Mac Mini and Mac Pro. I can’t see a Mac Pro shipping with M2 Max, no Mac Pro has ever used the same chip as a Macbook Pro, the beastly tower has to be on a whole other level from a laptop. So what other desktop model gets M2 Max besides the Studio? If they wanted to put M2 Max in Mac Mini they would have done it last week. No signs of a new 27” iMac Pro on the horizon since we have the Studio Display now.

Apple Silicon cycle is going a little more slowly than we first expected, there’s no way Mac Pro waits for M3 Ultra next year. The M1 and M2 cycles show Apple likes starting with announcing the base M chip for consumers before scaling it up to pro models. M3 Ultra will only come after M3, then M3 Pro and Max.

Maybe Mac Pro gets its own unique branding for Apple Silicon that’s not “M2 Ultra” but “X2” or something, as others have speculated… and then it’s on its own separate development cycle apart from M2/M3, but I think that’s unlikely. It would lose the “halo” effect of promoting the M2 line of Apple Silicon. Whatever special sauce the Mac Pro gets to enable expansion / extreme features will get its own fun branding like “Afterburner” and “MPX” on top of an M2 Ultra at its heart.

 

[jimthing]

Mac Pro will surely get it's own chip name, like the other desktops do:
Mini: standard+Pro / Studio: Max+Ultra / Pro: Ultra Duo+Ultra Quad

Mac Pro will be an M2 variant (e.g. M2 Ultra Duo+M2 Ultra Quad), as the standard M3's are no where near ready, let alone the M3 Pro/Max/Ultra ones.

Then the next gen M3's, with the typical order of release: Mx then Mx Pro+Max then Mx Ultra

 

[atonaldenim]

Mac Pro will surely get it's own chip name, like the other desktops do:
Mini: standard+Pro / Studio: Max+Ultra / Pro: Ultra Duo+Ultra Quad

That would be cool, but unfortunately Gurman’s latest reporting is that past plans for Jade 4C Die are cancelled, and the Mac Pro will launch with M2 Ultra and nothing beyond. It will still be faster than any Xeon option in the 2019 Mac Pro, so I am inclined to believe it.

I would definitely like to see dual M2 Ultras too, but that doesn’t seem likely this time. Maybe someday…

 

[Pressure]

I see no reason why the Mac Pro should use the same chip. It’s an expensive machine and will slot in over the $3999 Mac Studio M1 Ultra.

Apple could make a bigger 650-750mm2 chip for that alone and use UltraFusion on that. It could also replace the M2 Ultra and free up M2 Max chips for better selling units.

 

[atonaldenim]

It'll be like how the iMac Pro and the Mac Pro both offered Xeons, but all the other models offered Core i5/i7/i9.

Both the Mac Pro and the Mac Studio will offer M2 Ultra, the Mac Studio (plus Studio Display) is taking the place of the iMac Pro in the lineup as the slightly lower priced, less expandable "appliance" version of the highest-end machine.

Again, would be great if Gurman were wrong about the Mac Pro topping out at M2 Ultra! But then again it was Gurman who started the Jade 4C Die rumor to begin with...

 

[Jorbanead]

But which GPUs...?

M1 Max = 24-core base or 32-core full-die

M2 Pro = 16-core base or 19-core full-die

We now have more concrete data: https://www.macworld.com/article/556384/apple-silicon-iphone-a16-ipad-mac-m2-pro-max-benchmarks.html

It looks like the top M2 Pro has superior CPU capabilities, but the top M1 Max still jumps considerably ahead in graphics. Even the top M2 Max graphics aren’t that much better which is a bit of a disappointment.

So the M1 Max studio still seems to be a worthy machine over the top Mac mini for anyone who wants:

• Better GPU
• More ports/IO
• More ram options
• More storage options
• More audio/video coprocessors

 

[Boil]

• Better GPU
• More ports/IO
• More ram options
• More storage options
• More audio/video coprocessors

Yes to all except the storage options; the M1 Max Mac Studio & the M2 Pro Mac mini both have storage options up to 8TB; the Mac Studio being on two removable NAND blades & the Mac mini (M2 Pro variant) being on eight NAND chips soldered to the mobo...

Oh, and the one everyone overlooks, the M1 Max Mac Studio has 400GB/s UMA bandwidth, while the M2 Pro Mac mini has 200GB/s UMA bandwidth...

 

[Jorbanead]

Oh, and the one everyone overlooks, the M1 Max Mac Studio has 400GB/s UMA bandwidth, while the M2 Pro Mac mini has 200GB/s UMA bandwidth...

Yes that’s very true!

Actually related to that, new Logic Pro benchmarks are in, and it seems the M1 Max still pulls ahead and this may be due to either more ram and/or a higher memory bandwidth.

 

[sam_dean]

That would be cool, but unfortunately Gurman’s latest reporting is that past plans for Jade 4C Die are cancelled, and the Mac Pro will launch with M2 Ultra and nothing beyond. It will still be faster than any Xeon option in the 2019 Mac Pro, so I am inclined to believe it.

I would definitely like to see dual M2 Ultras too, but that doesn’t seem likely this time. Maybe someday…

If it wasn't cancelled or even a figment of a person's imagination...

M2 Extreme: Two M2 Ultra or four M2 Max

- 48-core CPU (32 performance + 16 efficiency cores)
- 120-core GPU
- 64 Neural engine core
- 384GB RAM

Linearly speaking 4x the performance of a M2 Max. Starting price $8k for a Mac Studio or $10k for a Mac Pro.