Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

New Desktop Macs With M2 Ultra and M2 Max Chips Could See WWDC Debut

AF_APPLETALK said:
Horse pucky.

The iPad never materialized as a replacement for the Mac. People voted with their dollars. iPad pushing people LOST that debate, even after Apple dumped probably boatloads of money into marketing the idea.

It's a fine device for using in the kitchen or sitting around on the couch, but creatives NEED screen space and file systems. Developers NEED the ability to install other runtimes. It doesn't matter how hard iPad people pout that "it's the future", if it can't run node js or python, it's a non-starter and will be ignored.

None of the iPad people can survive without digital creators (artists, editors, developers) making their preferred platform viable. It's odd that iPad people want to roll the clock back make life harder and more restrictive for the people who make every facet of their lives possible.
Click to expand...
That’s probably a bit far. Sure, it’s great on the couch and the screen size can be limiting (my wife loves her iPad mini), but I just edited my first wedding video on the iPad last week using FCP and it turned out great (given my learning curve). I loved how intuitive it was, compared to trying FCP on the Mac. I've also used it to draw house plans, prepare and sign official documents, and so many other things. I used to use everyday when I was a CSI for many things before I recently retired. Plus we know pilots use them, hospitals use them etc etc.

It has a camera but it won’t replace my Canon, but linking it to the camera gives me a great screen to control overhead shots when the camera is 8’ up.

There is very much a professional side to the iPad and also as a creative tool, so it is definitely NOT a non starter. It’s not for everyone or everything, even though it was marketed as ‘what’s a computer', so I take your point of boat loads of money. I don’t think it was meant to actually replace a desktop or laptop. But everyone has their own use case.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DeepIn2U, AF_APPLETALK and TheYayAreaLiving 🎗️
  • Like
  • Disagree
  • Love
Reactions: DeepIn2U, Serqetry, spaz8 and 2 others
I don't get why they wouldn't just release a Studio and Pro with M2 Ultra. Yes Studio would be cheaper but Pro would have more internal expansion and RAM probably. And if people don't need those, they can get the fastest chip in a cheaper studio. Who cares if Pro doesn't sell well? It never did.
 
  • Like
Reactions: rumz and AlphaCentauri
Kylo83 said:
im worried WWDC is becoming more of a hardware show and the software will have quick minor videos
Click to expand...
It’s okay, all they need to do is invite a couple less random developers presenting their pointless demos. I’d rather see new hardware, as Apple’s lineup is currently extremely stale.
 
Adult80HD said:
100% updated Studios with M2 Max and M2 Ultra, and the Mac Pro will be pre-announced with the M3, available late 2023.
Click to expand...
That's actually a pretty reasonable guess.

From most likely to least likely based on leaks, rumors, and the total amount of analyst comments:

  1. VR/AR Headset: Considering the press material Apple has put out for WWDC, there's no way it's a no-show.
  2. 15" M2 MacBook Air: Bigger battery and display compared to the 13" MBA. But Apple still wants to sell 13" M2 MBA so likelihood of M2 Pro or other spec bumps is unlikely.
  3. Mac Studios with M2 Max and Ultra.
  4. Mac Pro announcement or another teasing comment or short tease video. 50/50 odds on it being M2 or M3 as the latter is not actually on the table yet. But it would be kinda strange to do M2 for all current Macs while announcing that Apple is actually already moving onto the third generation chips. Once the M3 "cat" is out of the bag then that's all anyone wants, even those just getting the low-end or mid-tier Macs. Already M2 feels like old news to a lot of consumers.
  5. Anything M3 being launched, announced or teased. I don't see the rush to do M3 at WWDC, especially not when Apple probably wants the AR/VR Headset to make the biggest impression. But this is all speculation and assumptions on two very different announcements that we only have very vague, general details about.
Maybe Apple wants to blow us away and carpet bomb us with a bucket load of products we thought we'd have to wait much longer for? Maybe our guesses haven't been conservative enough and all we're getting is the Headset and the 15" Air?
 
Glad to see that the Studio might be updated with M2. It needs to, otherwise not that many people are going to purchase one at those prices after everything else is M2. And I think Apple realizes that. Plus, they have so many M2 chips around, why not.

I'm sure Apple has some special something planned for the Mac Pro that will put it above the Studio in many ways.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Allen_Wentz
sherwinzadeh said:
Some Pros need an Intel Mac still. I need one just to use Docker to deploy to AWS Intel based instances. Virtualization doesn't work.
Click to expand...
You don’t need an Intel Mac - you just need a generic, headless x86 box running Linux which will probably cost significantly less than a Mac with equivalent computing power.

You can still run the docker client on a Mac (over a vpn from the local Starbucks if you want) - but the Docker Engine needs Linux and runs in a vm on the Mac anyway so giving it its own machine will be more efficient.

Or spin up a development instance in the cloud… (where all the standard images and other bulky data that you’d otherwise have to download lives). Thing is, even if that’s not convenient for you today, it’s the way things are heading, so companies like Apple aren’t going to pour money into developing personal x86 Docker boxes.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Unregistered 4U and Serqetry
lazyrighteye said:
Considering my M2 MBA is more powerful than any MacPro I've owned (expansion is another topic), I can see where some may forget. 🤪
Click to expand...
comparing apple to oranges...think how powerful an M3 based on N3 Mac Pro can be compared to your entry level M2 Mba
 
I suspect Apple has a Mac Pro ready to roll from a technical standpoint, but at this point I also suspect it may never see the light of day.

Mac and PC sales have cratered across the board, so sales are likely to be even lower than the lowest expectation when it was designed.

The extra technical capabilities are unlikely to make it more attractive than a Studio for all but a tiny proportion of Pros, particularly if it's sold at an even higher premium.

I think it's dead Jim.
 
I need a new desktop Mac with at least 64GB RAM. The new Minis are pretty nice but max out at 32GB.

Looking forward to Monday! 🤞
 
skippermonkey said:
No-one is talking about GPUs: I've yet to see anyone bleating on about how amazing Apple's SoC GPU performance is compared to AMD's offerings (let alone Nvidia). The Mac Studio may be faster than my Mac Pro, but it sure as hell gets fried when it comes to my Mac Pro's GPU performance.
Click to expand...
Apple’s SoC GPU performance is amazing compared to competing system-on-a-chip integrated GPUs which is exactly the edge Apple needs for the phones, tablets, ultraportable laptops and small-form-factor desktops which account for the vast bulk of Apple’s sales.

Meanwhile, the discrete GPU in your Mac Pro is - at best - only as good as AMD’s latest chipset (at worst, you‘re a year or two behind waiting for MacOS drivers or a MPX version to drop) which could just as easily be plugged in to a generic Xeon or Threadripper box that delivers more bangs-per-buck.

Reality is that the Mac Pro is only appealing to a shrinking niche of customers with MacOS-only workflows that justify paying the Apple Tax on a me-too Xeon tower blessed to run MacOS. With M1/M2, however, Apple have a range of distinctive products for “prosumer” customers that out-perform competitors with comparable form factors.

I think Apple would be very, very stupid to hold back on the M2 Max/Ultra Studio - which are distinctive products - to protect a M2 Mac Pro which, based on what we already know about M2, could not match Xeon-W or Threadripper in terms of memory capacity or PCIe bandwidth.
 
  • Like
Reactions: rumz, spaz8, freedomlinux and 3 others
jlc1978 said:
I suspect many of those buyers are going for ~$200 display which is good enough for their needs. To compete, Apple would need to make compromises that would turn off Apple's customers, so why not sell the a powerful machine and let them decide what display to buy based on price?

Look at Apple's mouse and keyboard - you can get very good mice and keyboard for a lot less, but they are low margin/high volume devices that are aimed at PC buyers and thus a manufacturer can compete on price given he expected volumes. Apple's volumes make competing with them unadvisable ; especially since such devices likely would impact sales of Apple's higher margin offerings.

Trying to compete with low margin inexpensive displays isn't Apple's strategy, so not having one makes sense. Apple's displays are for people who need heir features and are willing to pay the going rate.
Click to expand...

Ah the aspirational up-sell, a less devious version of what they did with the 10th Gen iPad. Sure, users could get the matching Apple accessories, but it'll cost them a fortune.

Logitech are making out like bandits though!
 
It is very hard to even come up with a scenario where an apple machine is the best choice for really advanced and taxing stuff. Anything that has to do with AI runs on CUDA/nVidia and the same goes for other HPC loads.
The only Mac only software is FinalCut and Logic and none of these needs ultra massive GPU so there the Studio shines. Only niche cases are for when PCI cards for audio or broadcast are needed.
I would have been a MacPro customer if Apple would have kept the base price sane and allowed for regular GPU updates. 2019 MP was so close but was priced too high and shot in the knees by the ASi announcement 6 months after it was available. (also a lot of software at the time (2020) had bad support for Metal so when that support finally arrived in 21/22, paying 15000$ for something with the power of a 5000$ PC was not that enticing)

A m2 ultra Studio would be a good desktop computer and fill most semi- high end needs that exist on Mac. If priced same as the m1 ultra, I look forward to getting one as my daily workhorse and then maybe upgrade a few years down the line.
For a Mac Pro to make sense to me (assuming pricing similar to the 2019), I would primarily want GPU power that is about 8x that of my m1max laptop. OTH I would not at all need 8x the CPU perf. So just putting in a large cluster of max chips would force me to pay for features I don't need. I really hope Apple have come up with something clever to both fix the GPU scaling issues and decouple it from the CPU. Most important though is that they present something about the MacPro so we finally understand the platform and if they are serious about high performance computing in workstations at all.
 
  • Love
Reactions: spaz8
Schizoid said:
Mac Pro is dead and Apple are hoping everyone’s forgotten about it.
Click to expand...
I think that's the price we had to pay to get some of the best laptops ever.
Apple's Silicon is an evolution of phones' chips: no ram slots, no dedicated GPUs, every bigger CPU must be custom developed instead of bought from Intel.
I don't think a Pro could ever be profitable. I'm surprised if one has ever been frankly, considering the amount of custom stuff they've always put in such low-volume selling machines.
 
Yea! Might jump for one of this, haven't had a desktop since the white G5.

No wait, I actually did have an iMac later on as well and loved that thing too.
 
Alex Cai said:
I've never seen a 60hz display over $999, no matter what camera or speakers or display quality it has.
Click to expand...
Plenty of those around, it's really hard to find a 120hz+ display that is not tailored towards the gaming crowd. I'd be happy to get one for work. So text would be priority, but would appreciate the refresh rate as well.
 
innerproduct said:
It is very hard to even come up with a scenario where an apple machine is the best choice for really advanced and taxing stuff. Anything that has to do with AI runs on CUDA/nVidia and the same goes for other HPC loads.
The only Mac only software is FinalCut and Logic and none of these needs ultra massive GPU so there the Studio shines. Only niche cases are for when PCI cards for audio or broadcast are needed.
I would have been a MacPro customer if Apple would have kept the base price sane and allowed for regular GPU updates. 2019 MP was so close but was priced too high and shot in the knees by the ASi announcement 6 months after it was available. (also a lot of software at the time (2020) had bad support for Metal so when that support finally arrived in 21/22, paying 15000$ for something with the power of a 5000$ PC was not that enticing)

A m2 ultra Studio would be a good desktop computer and fill most semi- high end needs that exist on Mac. If priced same as the m1 ultra, I look forward to getting one as my daily workhorse and then maybe upgrade a few years down the line.
For a Mac Pro to make sense to me (assuming pricing similar to the 2019), I would primarily want GPU power that is about 8x that of my m1max laptop. OTH I would not at all need 8x the CPU perf. So just putting in a large cluster of max chips would force me to pay for features I don't need. I really hope Apple have come up with something clever to both fix the GPU scaling issues and decouple it from the CPU. Most important though is that they present something about the MacPro so we finally understand the platform and if they are serious about high performance computing in workstations at all.
Click to expand...
Apple could have something up their sleeves that would be CUDA competitor. Could run on both Apple Silicon neural engine and GPU.
 
sunny5 said:
Which is using TSMC 5nm just like M1 series.
Click to expand...
The issue is that much of the market for high-end GPUs is either tied to CUDA (/Linux) or to Windows.
Neither of which is available on Apple products, so it is really, really questionable whether it makes any sense for Apple to produce hardware to run software that simply doesn’t exist on the platform. They have chosen to serve certain parts of the video market with dedicated hardware on their SoCs, so … how much remains to adress, really?

Apple has a niche in producing nice, performant hardware with generally good ergonomics and modest dimensions. For the people who are OK with paying a bit more for ”nice”.

As someone who is interested in computer hardware architecture, I’d love to see Apple produce a new Mac Pro system!
Do I think it makes any kind of sense for them to do so? No.
 
  • Like
Reactions: spaz8
Cobra Kai said:
I would take a 3nm M3 over an M2 Ultra any day. They seem like they'll be 4-6 months apart if this is true.
Click to expand...
Um.
An M3 chip will most likely be 4P4E cores. Perhaps 4P8E if we are lucky.

An M2 Ultra chip is likely 16P 8E cores.

The M2 Ultra will blow an M3 chip out of the water for anything that’s not single threaded.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back