Damn, I feel like we're moving too quickly. We're getting new MacBook Pros every 8-10 months it seems.
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.
MacBook Pro Now Expected to Get M5 Chip Before iPad Pro
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Nah, it's once every 12 months. But... as soon as apple start rolling out generation N of processors, they're already preparing to manufacture N+1, and so the rumours start. It's just how it works, and probably especially so right now with the ultra situation because 2x M4 max joined via ultrafusion just simply isn't good enough for the Mac Pro.
I say this as an m4 max owner - for a laptop it's a freaking amazing chip. It's amazing on the CPU side in its own right. But GPU wise? nowhere near close to what the Mac pro should have, and memory capacities are nowhere near adequate for that machine either. It needs to scale up to 4x or 8x Max to be relevant in that machine.
Otherwise Apple should stop wasting their time, just close the Mac Pro manufacturing line and just build studios.
Yes…but what would be a plausible option would be to put the M5 in Mac Pro. That would be a big plus since A.I. seems to be the focus for the next few years.
I would welcome a M5 Mac Studio personally and hope it gets some love, but my thoughts go with Apple updating Mac Studio to M4 this round.
I always found it so weird that the iPad Pro got the M4 first anyway.
Yep, takes the shine off a new purchase way too quickly.
Volume/price per unit is likely a factor. The M4 was a new process (N3E vs M3's N3B), resulting in a lower volume, lower yield, and a higher price per chip - initially. Once efficiently scaled, they could rollout to Macs. Since it seems the M5 will use the same process as the M4, it makes sense that they are able to release a high-volume product from the start.
Why do they feel the need to release new “major version” chips so fast? People quickly grow tired when there is no apparent difference between generation versions. They would be better off doing point or half generation differences, and then every few years doing a major version change (as they used to do with iPhones). If everything is the same every year, there is nothing to look forward to. People were always curious as to when macOS would finally be progressed to 11, but now that it’s just progressed one major version each year by default, no one cares anymore.
Last edited:
Curious what will happen when they get to M7. Are they just going to disregard the already existing M7 motion coprocessor?
What "M7 Motion Coprocessor?"
Also ... "there are FIVE LIGHTS! --- I don't understand how you can be so mistaken"
Last edited:
It makes no sense (at this point in Apple Silicon) to put the M4 Max in a Mac Studio to only 4 months later put an M5 Max into a MBP.
Furthermore, if TSMC really does get its 2nm process online in 2H of 2025, as they keep promising, I find it hard to believe that Apple would let Qualcomm, Nvidia, and Intel beat them to deploying TSMC's latest advancements.
Furthermore, if TSMC really does get its 2nm process online in 2H of 2025, as they keep promising, I find it hard to believe that Apple would let Qualcomm, Nvidia, and Intel beat them to deploying TSMC's latest advancements.
My iPad Pro M1 still smokes surfing the web and browsing YouTube.
They're tools to do a job - what do you think should happen? Engineers kick back and relax and declare "job done!" because you bought a machine?
Tech moves on... you don't always need the latest and greatest; you'll have an even better upgrade when it is time to retire your shiny new machine in 3-5 years!
Because there are major improvements between versions? like 15% or so performance improvement, plus new CPU/GPU features?
You don't need to upgrade every release! But skip more than 1-2 generations and the incremental improvements are huge. If M1 is still good for you - GREAT! Nobody is forcing you to upgrade!
I bought an M1 Pro in 2021. I upgraded to M4 Max in 2024. 3 years pretty much to the day almost (could still renew the original 3 yr AppleCare+ on the M1 Pro).
Single thread benchmarks are like +50%. And in actual use - the difference in responsiveness is HUGE and it isn't because I went Pro to Max. I even noticed my iPhone 13 having as good or better interactive/low load responsiveness than my M1 based machines due to its A15 generation cores vs. the M1's A14 generation.
It's a huge improvement in light load, interactive scenarios like browsing, etc. The responsiveness of the M4 generation makes the M1 look like it's waiting on network or whatever and it just isn't.
Not saying M1 is bad. It was a massive step and still far and away better than anything intel had for 18-24 months after it was released.
But to deny the progress that has been made here indicates you either haven't used the machines back to back or are just really desensitised to slow performance.
AS an aside, I find it refreshing; when I got into computers in the late 80s/early 90s, progress was 100% improvement in 18 months or so. So twice as much improvement as we see today in M series! Sounds crazy today but that's how things were.
The past couple of decades have been really stagnant, it's great to see actual progress being made again! Instead of freaking 7 year old machines seeming reasonably up to date. 7 years old in computer years is 1.5 human lifetimes and progress used to reflect that in the 80s/90s.
To give some historical context. From 1990 to 1993 Apple went from the Mac classic with a Motorola 68000 @ 8mhz to the 1993 "Mac Classic" running a 68030 @ 16mhz. Performance difference there is like 300-400%.
1993 - 1996?
The 1996 equivalent was probably a PPC machine with 603e @ 120mhz. And that's just an insane improvement vs. the 16 MHz 68030. Like... 30X or more.
Last edited:
It is also about software that can actually take advantage of all the speed. The worst piece of software you can put on your M4 Max or whatever is iStat because it shows you how few applications can actually max out your CPU or GPU. So if the software you use can't fully utilize an M2, M3, etc -- the M5 is really just future-proofing, at best. But then, the argument goes, why not wait for the software to catch up and then buy the M7?
Anyway - this doesn't stop me for over-buying horsepower. Because, as a man, I have that brain malfunction that tells me that more is always better. I'm just aware of my inherent faults and fortunately can afford them.
Just because you aren't "maxing out the cpu" doesn't mean that a faster machine won't be snappier.
I rarely max out the M4 max, but the difference in responsiveness vs. m1 generation or intel (lol) is instantly noticeable as soon as you start opening apps on boot.
Agree with this 100%
I'm sitting here on my six year old 2019 Intel i9 iMac waiting seemingly forever for a Mac Studio update. It really would suck if an M4 Max (I do not need the Ultra) came out in June and then the M5 Pro & M5 Max comes out in October in MacBook Pros.
I'm really hoping for a surprise at WWDC with, as you say should be done, M5 series Mac Studios being introduced first.
HobeSoundDarryl
macrumors G5
I wouldn't get my hopes up very high... but at least it's a possibility... fueled by a logic chain that says the switch could be more profitable for Apple. They like more money.
Seems like the latter. Simply having an architectural design change without much of way of improving performance isn’t that big an attraction for most of us.
People who don’t currently own ANY Apple device are most certainly not tired of it.
And they are the intended customer. Sure, selling to someone that already owns one and simply can’t keep their money in their wallet is a nice bonus, but expanding the market to new users is always the goal.The days of them NEEDING to sell over and over again to the same small pool of users is behind them. They’ve said in the past half their Mac sales go to folks new to Apple.
Yes a lot of new Mac sales are directed to iPhone owners that never owned a Mac laptop, but it does require something that is very attractive/affordable with performance, not the Chip ID really mattering. Rushing just a thermals architecture for sustainable performance as mentioned in relation to iCloud services sounds fairly boring.People who don’t currently own ANY Apple device are most certainly not tired of it.
The days of them NEEDING to sell over and over again to the same small pool of users is behind them. They’ve said in the past half their Mac sales go to folks new to Apple.
I think the iPad Pro got the M4 first because Apple needed the additional display capacity vs. the M3. The power efficiency was another bonus.
I think they should focus on getting the best performance from each version, rather than drip-feeding them across ever-decreasing periods between ‘new’ releases.
Do you really think they have suddenly developed a whole bunch of brand new improvements in performance, only months after the previous release?
It just means potential customers are holding off new purchases, on the basis that the next new laptop they buy, will be old news 8 months later: “I was going to get the M4, but I can hold out a couple more years and get the M7…”
Why wouldn't it? If you look at any chart of Mac sales, it's like 48% Macbook Pro, 48% Air, 1% Mac Mini, 0.5% Imacs, and then 0.5% Mac Studio/Mac Pro