The specs and the price on the 13" are substantially lower than on the 14"/16" boxes. Half the memory bandwidth, etc.
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.
macOS Ventura Expected to Launch in Final Week of October With Support for Next 14-Inch and 16-Inch MacBook Pro
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Not true, plenty of advantage to the Studio. A Studio is ~$1,000 less expensive and a Studio has lots more ports and double the memory bandwidth. Plus one can get an Ultra Studio that is twice as powerful as the maximum MBP.
A M1 Max Mac Studio has the same memory bandwidth thruput as the M1 Max MacBook Pro. Doubling of memory bandwidth thruput is true for the M1 Ultra compared to the M1 Max.
The Mac Studio definitely have more thermal headroom compared to the MacBook Pro, so a Mac Studio's use case is for extended use of a computer running at or close to max performance without thermal throttling.
I read that Apple demonstrated a render farm using Mac Studios linked via TB4 cables during WWDC 2022. Using the Studio is definitely more practical compared to MacBook Pros in this instance.
I think one of the main reasons Apple is not having an event is because in addition to very modest upgrades the prices will be going up substantially - certainly outside the US.
Bit of a problem if Craig Federighi gets up on stage and says the new laptop is pretty much the same as the old one but they want $200 more for it.
Bit of a problem if Craig Federighi gets up on stage and says the new laptop is pretty much the same as the old one but they want $200 more for it.
I just wish they wouldn't release new models with a brand new macOS, with all those bugs! Instead release it with the last version of macOS. They used to do that frequently back in the day, but now they seem to always do this. Then it takes a year for the new Mac to feel stable. They did this with the 2019 MacBook Pro and that was frustrating!
It's nice how everybody takes just a part of the whole story and comment it as a main idea.
And to your comment, how can more external ports help to change the PCI graphic card for a new and more powerful generation, increase memory or change the ssd when it's getting unrealiable?
Secondly, even M1 Ultra can't compete with any real desktop processors. https://www.tomshardware.com/news/apple-m1-ultra-benchmarked-in-passmark
And it's even worse when you compare graphic power.
Last edited:
The 13-inch MBP only exists because Apple wants to have a laptop with the suffix "Pro" that doesn't start at $2000. That's all. There are unfortunately a fair amount of buyers, both consumer and institutional (IT departments), who won't buy the Air because it's a "consumer" laptop, even though the spec differences are minor (and the Air is now in some ways actually ahead).
That isn't really their conclusion.
For PassMark Single Thread: the fastest CPU they cite, the 12900KF, is 8% faster in that table. That's hardly "can't compete".
For PassMark "High End CPUs": here, the Threadripper wins by a long shot. But few people buy a Threadripper, an EPYC, or a Xeon Gold or Platinum. I don't think "a 64-core CPU is 2.6 times as fast as a 20-core CPU" is much of a story. Core for core, the M1 Ultra is actually 21% faster.
So yes, there are faster CPUs. But "there are faster CPUs" and "the CPU can't compete" are… rather different assertions.
Sure, nobody cares that his CPU is 2 times slower and GPU 5x slower (rendering or any 3D) than something what can be bought. Nobody cares that he cannot change the gpu, SSD or ram. The incredible Mac Studio is far better than anything else so why bother!
The core issue is not about the price, ports and memory bandwidth. The core issue is whether the system has expandability internally and whether components can be swapped. Unless you tell us Apple wanting to let those professional users buying a new Mac Studio every 2-3 years (or even every year if Apple choose to do so) to get the greatest performance and features, and obsolete their previous generation working machine, then Mac Studio is NOT a suitable replacement for Mac Pro and those users needing expandability and upgradeability down the line.
Or, another scenario, Apple only leases Mac Pro to professional users and provides hardware upgrade program for them to get the latest and greatest, and take the machine away when the lease ends.
Oh and don't tell me "lots of ports=expandability". It's not, especially since Apple has zero plan to provide external GPU support on any Apple Silicon Macs.
Not planning on upgrading my iPad Pro 3rd generation 11 inch anytime soon. Looking forward to iPadOS 16 coming out, have it running on my 10.5 iPad Pro that has a cracked screen and haven‘t seen any issues with iPadOS 16 yet, also have an iPhone 14 which has iOS 16 and haven’t seen any issues with it yet. Debating if I will upgrade to Ventura on my 2020 m1 MacBook Air or not, since most of what I need to do I can do on my iPad Pro 3rd generation 11 inch with the m1 chip.
I'm gonna make sure I do my monthly Time Machine backups on my two main Macs this weekend, so I can then upgrade them to Ventura when it comes out. (Of course I'll upgrade my M1 Air first, and then the next day I'll do an OpenCore Legacy Patcher upgrade to Ventura on my 2015 Retina 15" MacBook Pro.) Then I'll also upgrade my work iMac, as it's a 2017 model that will support Ventura.
Yes but how about applications? People run windows to run windows software, not run windows to use notepad.
High Sierra is the last 32-bit compatible OS without compromise. I don’t care how Apple brands Mojave’s 32-bit support. An OS popping up windows yelling at me “your 32-bit app will no longer be supported” is not an OS I’m willing to use for 32-bit applications.
Windows has its uses and so does linux.
I run Parallels 18 and Windows 11 and its fine for what it is, minimal Windows.. I prefer the real thing though. Would be nice to get Proton working on their also.
no its not. its the best color. the other choices were urine and the same old same old.
You are correct of course that an M1 Max Mac Studio has the same memory bandwidth thruput as the M1 Max MacBook Pro. I was generalizing when I stated that the Studio has double the memory bandwidth. MBPs come in 13" at 100 GB/s, 14"/16" Pros at 200 GB/s and 14"/16" Max at 400 GB/s; Studios come in Max at 400 GB/s and Ultra at 800 GB/s. The top of the MBP range and the bottom of the Studio range do have identical memory bandwidth.
Unlike many here, I do not consider M2 over M1 to be just a spec bump. I create things, and every new iteration improves, including many undocumented but nevertheless substantive changes. The M2 versus M1 creation will have been similar at Apple; there will be thousands of lines of code changes, etc. For me M2 per se has a lot of value. Using a box one year newer for every year of the life of a new box is not insignificant. Plus of course an M1 will reach EOL at least one year sooner. The M2 versus M1 decision IMO is valued at much more than the ~$250 some imply.
I have been studying the detail because we bought a 13" M2 MBP when it came out and will also buy either a 16" MBP (M1 or M2 depending on prices at the time) or a Studio after we see what the M2 MBP specifics are.
Last edited:
Keep in mind that CPU memory bandwidth tops out slightly above 200 GiB/s. Anything above that is only used by the GPU.
Sure, nobody cares that his CPU is 2 times slower and GPU 5x slower (rendering or any 3D) than something what can be bought. Nobody cares that he cannot change the gpu, SSD or ram. The incredible Mac Studio is far better than anything else so why bother!
That’s an astonishing amount of weird strawmen. Hope it was worth it!
I run VS in a VM. Most stuff works. Performance is decent.
Apple hasn’t announced any more M2 macs aside from the MBA, and 13” MBP. Is the only Mac they update the 14”/16” MBPs now? Mac Mini, iMac, Mac Pro where are the updates before laptops.
This is trivially obvious.
The next big SoC update (for desktop machines) was designed targeting TSMC N3, because common sense.
(You want to add features that depend on having more transistors, price per chip is less of a concern, and the timeline is flexible enough that you can take the risk of some delay.)
BUT TSMC N3 is being delayed. Unclear quite how much, but the general picture seems to be that volume production was expected to begin in perhaps September and it's being delayed by (let's hope only) about two months.
So Apple is stuck.
This is not a massive catastrophe in the sense that the overall strategy to some extent padded in this possibility: iPhones have not been hurt, and portables (iPads, MBA, low-end MBP) can of course use M2. If it's only a two-month delay, the rest will wait.
Some reshuffling *may* have occurred (or may be planned, leaking out as rumors that may or may not ever come true). Apple probably have a *plan* for a beefed up M2-based mac Mini (though my guess is that was originally planned for the N3 chip), and perhaps even for M2-Pro/Max based designs. Presumably those can be created "virtually" at just some engineer cost, with a plan in place to make the masks and start running the lines as soon as necessary.
Truth is, presumably TSMC are giving their best estimates as to time, Apple are running their best estimates as to cost and delay, and none of us outside know whether what we will actually see is the N3-based plan (hopefully shipping machines by say January) or the back-up plan (scramble to design an M2-Max/Pro, scramble to make the masks, scramble to fab the chips).
Thanks for that useful info. My 2016 i7 MBP gets the SBBOD quite a bit now, so I am ready for upgrade. The old MBP is still mostly OK for mobile usages though, so I might get a cheaper Studio and make the desktop setup a permanent one. First however we need to see the M2 MBPs.
Any specifics about poor optimization with Capture one? I own a 2019 16" i9 MBP and was thinking of upgrading to an M2 Max MBP. I primarily use C1 for my photo editing and I would've figured all the bugs would've been ironed out by now.
Where is the logic of using we are all waiting for 3-nanometer chip design SoC's excuse? The M1 Pro/Max/Ultra are more than adequate to use updating Mac minis, iMacs (both sizes) for desktops. The recent M2 could be used also for Mac mini and 24" iMac. Mac Pro is not going to use 3-nanometer chip design as it's delayed needlessly. Apple obviously has part shortages necessitating this dribble of AS based computers. Also I'm sure they have manufacturing problems too or there would be more product rollouts using the existing AS SoC's.
I agree process node isn’t the reason except possibly on the high end (it might be why we haven’t seen the Mac Pro preview yet).
I don’t think we’ll see that. The Pro/Max/Ultra Mini exists; it’s called the Studio. We might see a Pro mini eventually, but probably not a Max one, since at that price point, you’re already above the Studio’s entry level anyway.
Last edited:
My list would be
- The best 32” display they can produce (price doesn't matter)
-Ventura and iOS 16 without bugs
-Notes app update (I just hate the icon and color)
-AppleTV remote with find my
-Mac Pro
Don't know about bugs, but there is a Youtube channel "ArtIsRight" and he tests performance of various photography apps on Intel and M1 M2 Macs. Based on his tests Capture One does not scale well with more RAM, CPU cores and GPU cores on M Macs, meaning it does the job faster but not THAT fast for what the hardware is capable of. https://www.youtube.com/c/ArtIsRight/videos
He did tests for all Apple Silicon Macs with different configurations, even M1 Ultra and newest M2 MacBook Air and MacBook Pro in base or 24GB RAM variations. I recommend to check his results. Was not happy when I discovered it either, as I mainly use Capture One as well.