I understand you love your machine and you’re right, it is a great one. Still from M2 Max and M4 Max the difference is quite big, from performance, to 3D, and all efficiency.
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.
Mac Studio With M4 Max and M3 Ultra Chips Could Launch This Week
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
To paraphrase a joke about the failure rate of economists: Gurman has predicted 11 out of the last 5 product releases.
If that is the case they should not call it an M3 then. Just the number alone will make people skip it. M5 Max is on the way in about a year.
Not for me. If an M3 Max Mac Studio works for anyone else, I say have at it. No judgement.
Last edited:
It is not like they didn't hold off the M3 Max Studio, that literally happened.
The Mac desktop "strategy" has always been wonky, probably ever since Mac laptops become the core Mac business.
Is M4 available? In the unique die case , there wouldn't be M4 Unique until the production of M4 Max was over the capacity that the M4 Max were soaking up. Likewise notice that the MBA didn't shift to M4 right away. Again need substantially more wafers for the volume that the M4 cranks out.
M3 Ultra right as M3 MBA wafer allotment drops to zero wouldn't necessarily be uncoupled.
Or if Apple Private Cloud Compute soaked up M3 Ultras as a higher priority than the Mac line up.
For N3 (and smaller) with the wafer costs higher Max'es for laptops with a completely useless die allocation is wasteful where the laptops run 'millions' and the others don't run multiple millions.
Nvidia and AMD big die GPUs are on TSMC N4 variants because N3 had bumps in the road to high volume production. If an even bigger single die , the Max 3 could have made it out the door while 'something bigger" still had cost issues.
If it is an 'even bigger die' then M4-series (and N3E ) has big die issues also. In short, there are a couple of timeline hiccups that can occur if the "ultras" are decoupled from the laptop Max's.
errr? Does he? Gurman has lots of "I think" , "I suspect". And occasionally "Apple sources says". But a wide variety of other parties?????? Not really. Kuo did supply chain for a long time. Gurman in his heyday seems to have someone in marketing or product testing on speedial. Gurman's 'sources' don't seem all that broad. Also seems that some of the Apple ones got exposed at some point also.
When Gurman mentions "suppliers" doe that come before or after Kuo , Display silo , etc other supply chain info leaks? (jumps on echo chamber).
I'm would not be surprised if they skipped M3 Ultra. Not because "M5 is just around the corner". But that they were on either M-even Ultra or M-odd Ultra . An Ultra for every generation seems like major problem. Even with possibly throwing in a 100K for Private Cloud compute ... the run rate is relatively small for the size/complexity of the chip to toss them in the garbage can every 12 months.
While Apple did a M2 after the M1 , the roll out of the M2 Ultra was very elongated. And M2 to M2+? has been even longer.
You'd minimally need to ID two sides the Ultra was not on; not just one. That picture is pretty bad. It is hard to discern where the memory controllers are. If can't see those then Ultrafusion obscured from view is in the same ballpark.
If Apple had a 4 x SoC extreme ‘Hidra computer that peaked at 250W - that only a Mac Pro could cool down without sounding like a jet engine - Power Users could flock to a Mac Pro.
If there is No extreme compute offering == No reason that the Top CPU/GPU offering from Apple needing differentiation between the Studio and the Pro (as they could both likely cool a 2 x SoC offering).
If the Studio and Mac Pro are niche products - would it really make sense for Apple to manufacture a boat load of M3 Ultras & a new separate non-hidra SoC for the Mac Pro?
Apple could do however is limit the 2025 Mac Studio to 256GB memory, and set the base Mac Pro configuration to have 256GB, with an upper limit of 512GB (or 1TB).
Mac Pro would represent users wanting Huge memory OR PCI expansion .. and Mac Studio for a more modest 256GB limit, and no PCI expansion. Apple could even sweeten the Mac Pro deal with a minimum configuration of 2TB SSD to help justify the price gap.
If Apple keep there performance of the 2025 Mac Pro under wraps when they release the Mac Studio … it think many a users that has been waiting patiently for almost a year after the M4 iPad Pro came up will decide to wait for 3-4 months for the Mac Pro to come out - so they don’t get buyers remorse. If they end up sitting on the fence until August in a Q3 release of the Mac Pro …. October 2025 could bring the announcement of an M5 Pro Mac Mini .. and a serious loss of excitement in wanting to buy the Mac Studio they have been dreaming about all this time.
TLDR : If Apple does stagger the release of the Mac Studio and Pro - they will have to release their expectation of how much faster the 2025 Mac Pro is expected to be to ensure that those that Need a Studio actually pull the trigger. My guess is the 2025 Mac Studio & Pro will both share top CPU&GPU configurations - but the Pro will have at least twice the maximum memory and internal SSD.
If there is No extreme compute offering == No reason that the Top CPU/GPU offering from Apple needing differentiation between the Studio and the Pro (as they could both likely cool a 2 x SoC offering).
If the Studio and Mac Pro are niche products - would it really make sense for Apple to manufacture a boat load of M3 Ultras & a new separate non-hidra SoC for the Mac Pro?
Apple could do however is limit the 2025 Mac Studio to 256GB memory, and set the base Mac Pro configuration to have 256GB, with an upper limit of 512GB (or 1TB).
Mac Pro would represent users wanting Huge memory OR PCI expansion .. and Mac Studio for a more modest 256GB limit, and no PCI expansion. Apple could even sweeten the Mac Pro deal with a minimum configuration of 2TB SSD to help justify the price gap.
If Apple keep there performance of the 2025 Mac Pro under wraps when they release the Mac Studio … it think many a users that has been waiting patiently for almost a year after the M4 iPad Pro came up will decide to wait for 3-4 months for the Mac Pro to come out - so they don’t get buyers remorse. If they end up sitting on the fence until August in a Q3 release of the Mac Pro …. October 2025 could bring the announcement of an M5 Pro Mac Mini .. and a serious loss of excitement in wanting to buy the Mac Studio they have been dreaming about all this time.
TLDR : If Apple does stagger the release of the Mac Studio and Pro - they will have to release their expectation of how much faster the 2025 Mac Pro is expected to be to ensure that those that Need a Studio actually pull the trigger. My guess is the 2025 Mac Studio & Pro will both share top CPU&GPU configurations - but the Pro will have at least twice the maximum memory and internal SSD.
It would be massively disappointing if, after this long a wait, Apple opted for a contrived M3 Ultra (which, if extant, should have been released along with the rest of its generation) vs. a genuine M4 variant, benchmarks of which have already demonstrated significant gains in GPU performance in the lower end chips. If an M4 Ultra isn't ready, they should just wait with the release. These are meant to be pro-level products and the user base is not interested in a $4,000 computer getting the budget iPhone treatment with last year's hardware. I personally wasn't biting at the bit to get a new Studio, as my M2 is humming along flawlessly; but an upgrade is categorically DOA if there's no M4 Ultra.
Not likely true to workloads that actually can consume the extra bandwidth and GPU cores that Ultra has over the plain M4/5 offering. Having 4x as many cores will gap having far fewer cores that are 10-20% faster ( less than 2x improvement.)
In single thread drag racing sure. However, if that is the primary workload target why buy an Ultra (any version) in the first place?
The Studio was released until a 1.5 years into Apple's two transition. The Mac Pro after the two year transition was past. The largest die option is not going to be the leading edge.
Apple silicion is primarily designed around mobile first. Faster MBP 14/16" has higher priority over the 'Ultra' Studio or the Mac Pro.
The Studio and Mac Pro are on M2 now. The MBP 14"/16" are on M4. That is two generation behind right now. Two generation behind 'can't happen'? That is a bit short on evidence.
The M3 Ultra only in the Studio would be pointless more so if that was the only product it was going into. It M3 Ultra was entangled with Private Cloud Compute somehow that could be dragging it along into existence. IMHO, it would make more economic sense if the Ultra went either all evens ( M2 , M4 , M6) or all odds ( M3 , M5 ) . Throwing a big die product in the garabage can every 12 months isn't going to work long term.
MBA M3 are hanging around for extended period of time. to help pay for the 3rd generation . MBA M4 only comes after the iPad Air picks up a substantive amount of volume. ( there is a "Hand me down" process through other parts of the line up). The "Ultra" (and Max) really doesn't have a 'hand me down'. That is an issue.
M3 Ultra isn't 'old' since it hasn't even been released yet. As for newest PCs doing the work that older larger computers did ... that has been the general course of things for the last couple of decades. One of the major points of Apple Silicon is so that a MBP can do most of the workload that a Mac Pro did 5-6 years ago.
If have thousands more level of problematically heavy workload to do then thousands more is fine. But if your workload levels are plateauing in parallelism and/or complexity then should be moving to the more affordable spectrum of the Mac product line up.
once they have the Max ready they should release the studio - they can release the Ultra later.
I have few key note for studio’s fan (like me)
1 From beginning of this year, there are only M4 Max studio variant had been test.
2 Beside GPU, performance-wise M4 max is faster than M2 Ultra.
3 Release just single SOC variant for studion is greate for boost Mac Pro (with Ultra chip) sale.
1 From beginning of this year, there are only M4 Max studio variant had been test.
2 Beside GPU, performance-wise M4 max is faster than M2 Ultra.
3 Release just single SOC variant for studion is greate for boost Mac Pro (with Ultra chip) sale.
This makes no sense at the moment.
I can see a brand new chip and them calling it the M4 Ultra with the one going into the Mac Pro being the new M5 Ultra but M3? Choose between the M4 Max or the M3 Ultra in the Studio. Just doesn't seem to work for Apple's marketing unless they are changing the numbers game completely.
If this does happen, Apple better have a good video explaining what this is all about and why M3.
A new chip based on completely obsolete chip tech that isn't being made any more or this M3 is just in name only and actually M4 tech under the M3 label with the M4 with even more newer tech for the Mac Pro. So much is going through my head right now.
At least we won't have to wait long to find out if this is even a thing or a dud of a rumour.
I can see a brand new chip and them calling it the M4 Ultra with the one going into the Mac Pro being the new M5 Ultra but M3? Choose between the M4 Max or the M3 Ultra in the Studio. Just doesn't seem to work for Apple's marketing unless they are changing the numbers game completely.
If this does happen, Apple better have a good video explaining what this is all about and why M3.
A new chip based on completely obsolete chip tech that isn't being made any more or this M3 is just in name only and actually M4 tech under the M3 label with the M4 with even more newer tech for the Mac Pro. So much is going through my head right now.
At least we won't have to wait long to find out if this is even a thing or a dud of a rumour.
That's probably way overstating things, but yeah, we needed new Studios upgraded LAST YEAR, so this is as good a time as any. The sooner, the better. And as others have mentioned, It makes no sense for the Max versions of the Studios not to be updated with all the other Max machines. Ultras, I get, those are specialty chips, but there is no reason not to update the Studios on the same time frame as the MacBook Pros.
It sounds like Apple is making the large chip after all. I like this idea much more. M5 Ultra coming this year for the Mac Pro.
To be honest the high end Mac setups are very expensive. I refuse to spend more than 2000 euros on a new computer, and I want things to get cheaper over time, not ever more expensive.
Luckily the bottom end machines get ever faster and cannibalise more of the market as people realise they don’t actually need a Mac Studio with M4 Ultra but can do their work comfortably and well on a Mac Mini with M4 Pro for a fraction of the money.
So I’m finding I am moving down the list of Mac models. A long time ago I used to buy Tower Desktops, then I moved to All-in-ones, and my next buy will probably be a base spec Mac Mini.
problem is: although they are releasing the MacBookPros with the new Max chips in November, they are delaying the Mac Studios (maybe waiting for an Ultra Chip - maybe not). So when the Mac Studio finally is released, the new generation (with increased single core performance) is starting to become available.
This is a crazy product strategy - makes no sense at all
This is a crazy product strategy - makes no sense at all
This is stupid; I hope Apple will not do that.
Even if it were to use M3 cores I would call it M4 Ultra to avoid the confusion in the lineup.
Even if it were to use M3 cores I would call it M4 Ultra to avoid the confusion in the lineup.
So you mean, the Mac Studio is only going to have one M4 Max variant this time, which should be the factor that boost the eventual Mac Pro's sales since the Mac Pro will use something better? Instead of having M3 Ultra or whatever chip in the Mac Studio. This frankly makes much more sense than the Gurman nonsense.
By the way, I seem to remember you being the person who leaked "Apple has been testing a Mac Pro in a small box" months before anything even mentioned the Mac Studio's existence., that was you right?