New MacBook Pros With M2 Pro and M2 Max Chips Now 'Well Into Development'

That's all well and good, but I'm a bit bothered by the lack of rumors on the iMac and Mac Mini. Hopefully they will be getting M2 this fall. And hopefully there will be an M2 Pro Mac Mini (otherwise why keep the higher-end Intel Mac Mini around?)
 
MacRumors said:
Apple's next-generation 14-inch and 16-inch MacBook Pro models with M2 Pro and M2 Max chips are "well into development and testing," and there is still a chance the notebooks will be released later this year, according to Bloomberg's Mark Gurman.
Click to expand...
The only thing diffident is this 14/16 MBP rumor is well into development. :D
 
MayaUser said:
If 3nm is ready by summer next year...please Apple stop...we dont want a new 5nm Mbp , we can wait for 6 months instead of waiting for more than a year
But i guess if the new Mbp are already in development and testing is too late....so we get 5nm in the fall/winter and next 3nm change in late 2023 or spring 2024....
Click to expand...
Some of us do want a new 5nm MBP, right now; yesterday even. We want the kinds of improvements v2 of the new M-series chip design can bring, right now. M1 proved the power & efficiency unequivocally.

However, the "No major design changes" observation does bother me personally, a lot. M1 seriously lamed the MBPs by reducing the Thunderbolt ports to 3. For those of us using top MBPs for pro work (why else would we routinely pay $4k for a laptop?) the TB port reduction was a huge loss. That reduction of M-series MBP overall competence may yet be enough to drive me to a much cheaper Studio instead of a top M2 MBP.
 
Nepenthe said:
This is great and all but TBH the last thing I want in a Mac Pro tower is a chip which focuses on power efficiency. Please crank up the power and give us something with higher core speeds for intensive audio processing since the M-series Media Engines are largely unused during CPU-intensive tasks such as music production and spatial audio mixing.
Click to expand...
Agreed, we want Johny to introduce something utterly bonkers like 8 M2s combined that run at full whack in a nice big tower for cooling.
And i want him to say, “Cruuush” again I like it when he says that.
 
jz0309 said:
the 3nm M chips are not "well into development", they are done, ready for volume production ...
And why would Apple redesign the 14/16 MBPs? they're just a year "old" ...
Click to expand...
The article said macbook pros based on the chips were 'well under developement', not the chips. Nor did it say they were going to be 'redesigned''. Reading comprehension my love 😘
 
MayaUser said:
is not about that...still going from M1 pro/max 5nm to pro/max 3nm would be even greater, armv9 etc...is about timing
If they release in November/December another 5nm that means we have to wait for the 3nm for another full year instead of waiting a bit and be among the first to introduce the 3nm laptop into the market in the summer. Think about M1 Mba how it was way ahead in 2020 to any other laptops. So i would prefer to wait longer, from December to June for a new 3nm die than wait till December 2023 for it
Click to expand...
No, "we have to wait for the 3nm for another full year" is not what it means. Apple usually, perhaps always, updates MBPs more than once year.

No way it would take until December 2023 for the next iteration under any scenario other than possibly no available components. And given that Tim Cook was one of the world's best supply chain managers for years before becoming Apple CEO, I seriously doubt that Apple will fail to obtain components.
 
Think it's going to be difficult to get people with M1 Pro/Max MBP's to upgrade when it works so well already. Any improvements will be minimal and probably not very noticeable in every day use for the majority of current M1 MBP owners. Especially when the design is identical. Apple is painting themselves into a corner.
 
ScooterComputer said:
Two things…
First, you don't need to be Kreskin to grok that Apple is working on the successor to the M1 MBP Pros. They've been doing that since about, oh, 4 months before the M1 shipped. Or more. It kinda amazes me how folks don't seem to understand how computer engineering works. Apple makes these things… entirely… they have the ability, in house, to fab prototype boards AND prototype wafers… they've been running M2 since before the M1 shipped. (At least some of their folks have been, "secrecy" and all.) And, there really shouldn't be a need to mod the chassis yet. Even with M3/3nm, I don't see any great change to be made in chassis, there just isn't much necessary left.
Second, I think—"IMHO"—it is fairly important for Apple to keep a cadence in releasing these M- chips. They need to show that they're keeping out ahead of Intel/AMD, or the entire thing becomes a farce. Yes, the M1 was a HUGE leap forward in performance… but it also shipped 18+ months/a year ago (for the Pro/Max)… Intel/AMD have not been standing still. Apple cannot fall behind… they can't even stand still! If they fall behind Intel/AMD (like they did after the PowerPC switch), it won't be good. And the viewpoint that "well, speed is less important than power consumption/heat" I don't think entirely holds water, and is pretty much directly contradicted by Apple's PR messaging (which is that Apple is providing BOTH). If Apple sits on releasing the M2 Pro/Max, and doesn't show that they've gotten their legs under them—are able to revise these chips quickly, on a similar cycle as Intel—it would effectively look like Apple is admitting that the "complaint" against Intel not being able to deliver in a timely manner, as needed by Apple for their product line ambition, was somewhat wrong… because Apple isn't delivering on a year-over-year cycle either.

I've stated it before, but I think Apple is working internally to get the "cart" back behind the "horse"; the M1 was effectively a muscled up A- series chip, that then got subsequently bulked up for the M1 Pro/Max/Ultra. That's not how you want to design your chips… you want to design your "leaps" first, and then back-port. That's the way to make money, because you're always skating to where the puck is going… rather than just expecting (read: praying) you're going to end up where the puck ends up. (And that's exactly what Intel got lazy and did… and it cost them.) I think Apple is really working on the M3 Max/Pro/Ultra core and fab'ing right now… that's where they're focused internally. The M2 Pro/Max/Ultra is still a 5nm afterthought. And it is possible that they are doing the business calculation of "can we just stretch the M1 Pro/Max out until 3nm is ready and then jump directly to that??", but I hope not. Again, IMHO, cadence is important here: showing everyone you're on a cycle, that you can meet your schedule, and that consumers can rightly expect performance improvement on a rational timeframe. 18 months to 24 months per bump is just a bit too long, we've been so Pavlov-trained for a 1-year cycle… and Apple holds much of the blame for that!
Click to expand...
You say
it is possible that they are doing the business calculation of "can we just stretch the M1 Pro/Max out until 3nm is ready and then jump directly to that??", but I hope not.

I too would love to see 3nm MBPs right now, but think it unlikely (just my guess) given how pricey poor yields from the novel 3nm chip would raise costs. We will see. Either way (3nm/5nm) I expect to see new high end MBPs in 2022.
 
Haust said:
Think it's going to be difficult to get people with M1 Pro/Max MBP's to upgrade when it works so well already. Any improvements will be minimal and probably not very noticeable in every day use for the majority of current M1 MBP owners. Especially when the design is identical. Apple is painting themselves into a corner.
Click to expand...
It's odd, but this has to be repeated with every single new Apple product release:

In general, if you already own the last iteration of an Apple product release, you are NOT the target upgrade market. This update is not aimed at M1 Pro/Max owners. It's primarily aimed at Intel Mac owners and people without Macs.
 
chucker23n1 said:
That seems unlikely.

The M2 is just a 10% bump; 18% for multi-core. Expect something similar for the M2 Pro.

Recent Apple A generations went up 37%, 26%, 22%, 18%, 20%, 8%. You’d have to go further back to the A9, which went up 73%. If we go all the way back to Geekbench 3 results, the A6 went up 226%, and the A7 another 100%. But that’s long ago. The M3 is very unlikely to give a massive improvement like that. Even if Apple could do that, they’d have no incentive to; it makes more sense to spread such changes over multiple generations, especially as long as the competition is lagging.
Click to expand...
Single core jump should remain the same of course, but multicore more with rumored 12 cores instead of 10 (I expect 25% instead of 18%), plus the GPUs will be significantly faster and also more of them. And there are some accelerator upgrades even in M2. Altogether very nice yearly upgrade - not for M1 Pro/Max users, but in general terms even better performance level.
 
bookofxero said:
Another unpopular opinion: do we really need yearly (or shorter) upgrade cycles? Why not biennially? If the improvements are truly significant ("revolutionary" even), then do not be beholden to timelines, but despite their name we all know these are primarily consumer devices.
Click to expand...
Yes, tech moves fast and we do need short upgrade cycles for marketing purposes. However an upgrade often can be just a speed bump of some kind or new USB/WiFI/memory bandwidth/whatever. Switching to a new process or new M-series is not required.
 
I'm keeping track of this to see when the new Mac Studio will be released. I won't upgrade to it as my current Mac Studio is fine, but I enjoy seeing what is new with each iteration.
 
munpip214 said:
Not that Intel was blameless but Apple also didn’t update devices every time there was a new chip available. At the beginning of Intel based devices they did and got the first ones, but then the last few years they would release a chip with improvements that was compatible but for some reason Apple chose to skip it. So then delays seems to extend longer than necessary.
Click to expand...
Often there was almost no performance improvements in the Intel chips that would warrant doing another integration. That was also during the period when Apple was focused almost entirely on the iPhone and and considered the Mac to be a “finished” product that didn’t need to progress. They have obviously done an about-face on that.
 
Haust said:
Think it's going to be difficult to get people with M1 Pro/Max MBP's to upgrade when it works so well already. Any improvements will be minimal and probably not very noticeable in every day use for the majority of current M1 MBP owners. Especially when the design is identical. Apple is painting themselves into a corner.
Click to expand...
I don’t think that Apple is really trying to get M1-series owners to upgrade, though of course they would love that. Their aim is to get all those people with Intel Macs to upgrade.

Anyone with a one or two year-old Mac has little reason to upgrade unless they are moving to a different model. Most Mac owners keep their Macs for several years. Certainly four years is common and many go six, eight or more. Not everyone is on the same upgrade cycle. Then there are PC converts who were not even in the game but could be enticed by an updated processor.
 
jz0309 said:
the 3nm M chips are not "well into development", they are done, ready for volume production ...
And why would Apple redesign the 14/16 MBPs? they're just a year "old" ...
Click to expand...
Why redesign? Because M1 MBPs reduced i/o competence by reducing Thunderbolt ports from 4 to 3.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Back
Top