Rumor: New 14-Inch and 16-Inch MacBook Pros Delayed Until Next Year

[Realityck]

I mean, what rumored features are people waiting on? Seems like the Pro and Max chip are still ahead of what Wintel offers.

Some people that skipped buying the 14"/16" M1 Pro/Max MBPs so far, who have older Macs think they can just wait for the next models to arrive featuring the updated SoC's would be that much more faster and desirable, or look for the previous models to be even cheaper.

The problem is as most suggested the current models are more than capable for doing most tasks, even really pushed as shown on the YouTube testing.

If you were into AS platform games you would see higher FPS with new SoC's , but then again with Ventura's Metal 3 has already shown native game on a M1 Pro MacBook Pro that was getting 50+ FPS w/Metal2, now got 90+ FPS.

 

[chucker23n1]

I mean, what rumored features are people waiting on? Seems like the Pro and Max chip are still ahead of what Wintel offers.

In terms of performance per watt, yeah, Intel, AMD, Qualcomm can’t compete. In terms of highest performance on a laptop: if you’re OK with thick and heavy and noisy, you can get faster ones with Intel.

 

[EugW]

Some people that skipped buying the 14"/16" M1 Pro/Max MBPs so far, who have older Macs think they can just wait for the next models to arrive featuring the updated SoC's would be that much more faster and desirable, or look for the previous models to be even cheaper.

The problem is as most suggested the current models are more than capable for doing most tasks, even really pushed as shown on the YouTube testing.

If you were into AS platform games you would see higher FPS with new SoC's , but then again with Ventura's Metal 3 has already shown native game on a M1 Pro MacBook Pro that was getting 50+ FPS w/Metal2, now got 90+ FPS.

For the Mac mini I was waiting for a replacement to the Intel Mac mini, possibly with the same number of ports +/- a form factor update. I may end up getting neither but oh well, c'est la vie. I was prepared to wait though since I had a functioning, albeit old Mac Pro, plus a bunch of other machines already.

Actually, after the M1 Mac mini was released, my Mac Pro failed (fall of 2021), but instead of just buying the M1 Mac mini then, I ended up getting an ultra cheap 8 GB 2014 Intel Mac mini with SSD upgrade to tide me over for my business applications until (my prediction of) fall 2022 when the M2 series Mac minis got released. It looks like fall 2022 is wrong and it will likely be spring 2023, but if it does get released in the spring, that means my Intel Mac mini purchase only cost me ~US$10 per month during that 18-month period. Plus, I'll pass this down to my son next year anyway as he'll be needing one for school. He's using an old 2008 aluminum MacBook but that machine is very slow. My daughter was using that before and grew out of it very quickly, so I got her a 2015 MacBook Pro* last year.

Actually, I'm glad I waited though, since I'll probably end up getting a 24 GB model. 16 GB probably would have been fine, but I tend to keep my machines a very long time, and it will likely end up replacing my 24 GB 2017 27" iMac in a few years.

*P.S. I'm very pleased with that 2015 MacBook Pro. The screen is beautiful, it is reasonably sleek, it has real ports, and its performance is more than adequate for a young student, and yet it was inexpensive. It has capped out a Monterey, but I could see her using it for 5 more years.

 

[Maigrais]

To be fair it will be just like the iPad Pro a small update with just m2 support and that’s mainly it

No because iPad Pro retained the same manufacturing process for its SOC. These new laptops will move on and adopt an even more efficient one.

 

[swingerofbirch]

Well, it's kind of good news for me. I purchased a 14" MBP in September when it was on sale but have had so many chronic illness issues I haven't even opened and set it up yet. I felt a bit silly knowing a new one was coming out so soon. So it's not quite as dated as I had thought.

 

[Klapper.cz]

They're gonna eventually have to skip.

The A series is roughly on a 12-month schedule. The M series seems to be on an 18-month schedule (as the AX series as before).

The M1 launched two months after the A14, but the M2 launched nine months after the A15. The M3 will therefore likely be not A16-based but A17-based.

View attachment 2105016

Again with the "schedule" during the most unpredictable and turbulent time Apple makes the "schedule" as they go - your little coloured noodles doesn't define what Apple could/should do - the reality and their business plan based on what's profitable in a long run does, doesn't matter if some timeline isn't neat anymore

 

[Klapper.cz]

Sure there is. The fact that they already have a perfectly good M1 Pro/Mac/Extreme family.

First of all it's almost clear by now the M1 Extreme is not happening, they would be crazy not do M2 Extreme right away with all the delay by now and the bottleneck already happening in M1 Ultra. And it's a special case for the Mac Pro, it might even be named outside the M1/M2/.. family, simply outside the rest of the family "logic and flow" I'd say.
The point is going from M1 Pro/Max 10cpu/16gpu/32gpu config to M2 12cpu/18-or-20gpu/38gpu config, plus on A15 better tech, is exactly the right amount of upgrade one should expect from Apple in one cycle. CPU so so, but finally on the level interesting for those not yet having M1 Pro/Max, but the GPU a lot. Plus some accelerators improvements etc.
Going to M3 right away is too big of a jump, just giving it away too fast. It's a tried way of tick/tock, each cycle makes only something better - more cores and/or better core tech and/or better node - if they bring all 3 upgrades at once at 3nm right away (ignoring the fact it's not being made yet), what and how will they upgrade a year+ after that? There's just no magic big jump to be had out of thin silicon every year.
All I'm saying is doing M2 Pro/Max the 2 out of 3 upgrades per cycle is plenty, going to M3 Pro right away just doesn't make sense from any reasonable side, except it vaguely seem possible to "internet engineers" while ignoring the business side

 

[EdT]

Rumors are very contradictory, but I think it makes more sense a March release, because if new chips were ready now, Apple would also use them for a new Mac Pro, while everyone seems to agree on the fact that it will come next year.

I realize that the term ‘early’ is subjective but I think that 1/4 of the way into a year isn’t early. 4-6 weeks is early, with 6 weeks pushing hard against the meaning of the term ‘early’.

 

[chucker23n1]

Again with the "schedule" during the most unpredictable and turbulent time Apple makes the "schedule" as they go - your little coloured noodles doesn't define what Apple could/should do - the reality and their business plan based on what's profitable in a long run does, doesn't matter if some timeline isn't neat anymore

Like I said, the AX also wasn’t on a 12-month schedule.

Why would updating them more frequently be more profitable?

 

[MacLC]

Rumors are very contradictory, but I think it makes more sense a March release, because if new chips were ready now, Apple would also use them for a new Mac Pro, while everyone seems to agree on the fact that it will come next year.

I wish that were true but just look at how irregular they've been in updating their Mac Pro line over the last 10 years.

 

[darngooddesign]

I know this is a rumors site, but can we stop making up names for fantasy chips? Or at least be a little more creative. Mac Pro with M3 Transwarp or something like that. So that everybody knows, we're talking about science fiction.

Transwarp is the drive, not the CPU.

 

[ericsanto]

How about M2 Mac Mini? Also in March 2013?

 

[mrr]

Any word about a 27” iMac?

 

[EugW]

Any word about a 27” iMac?

There were rumours of a 27" iMac and 27" iMac Pro prototyped in 2021, but they never saw the light of day.

There is also a rumour of a new 27" display.

 

[ghanwani]

I’m not planning to buy one anyway.

 

[ericsanto]

I am also waiting for the update

 

[ericsanto]

For the Mac mini I was waiting for a replacement to the Intel Mac mini, possibly with the same number of ports +/- a form factor update. I may end up getting neither but oh well, c'est la vie. I was prepared to wait though since I had a functioning, albeit old Mac Pro, plus a bunch of other machines already.

Actually, after the M1 Mac mini was released, my Mac Pro failed (fall of 2021), but instead of just buying the M1 Mac mini then, I ended up getting an ultra cheap 8 GB 2014 Intel Mac mini with SSD upgrade to tide me over for my business applications until (my prediction of) fall 2022 when the M2 series Mac minis got released. It looks like fall 2022 is wrong and it will likely be spring 2023, but if it does get released in the spring, that means my Intel Mac mini purchase only cost me ~US$10 per month during that 18-month period. Plus, I'll pass this down to my son next year anyway as he'll be needing one for school. He's using an old 2008 aluminum MacBook but that machine is very slow. My daughter was using that before and grew out of it very quickly, so I got her a 2015 MacBook Pro* last year.

Actually, I'm glad I waited though, since I'll probably end up getting a 24 GB model. 16 GB probably would have been fine, but I tend to keep my machines a very long time, and it will likely end up replacing my 24 GB 2017 27" iMac in a few years.

*P.S. I'm very pleased with that 2015 MacBook Pro. The screen is beautiful, it is reasonably sleek, it has real ports, and its performance is more than adequate for a young student, and yet it was inexpensive. It has capped out a Monterey, but I could see her using it for 5 more years.

Same here, I'm waiting for the new Mac mini. My old 2014 Mac mini is not enough for my 4K display at 60Hz, I had to down to 2K/60Hz for it to working smooth. Apple! Please release the update soon!

 

[Dark_Omen]

All these people saying Apple should shift to longer cycles. Y'all realize that the vast majority of MacBook Pro buyers aren't upgrading every year. There's a ton of us that are still using Intel versions. When it comes time to upgrade I'd prefer to have the newest version available, not held back for arbitrary reasons.

That being said it makes sense why these are being delayed. I think this practically guarantees the new MacBook Pros will be on the 3nm fabrication node. This jives with previous rumors about 3nm production ramping up in Q4 2022 and TSMC receiving revenue for those chips in Q1 2023. Apple historically loves to introduce stuff in March.

I'm a little sad since I need a new one soon and was really hoping for WiFi 6E. The discounts on the current M1 MacBook Pros will definitely soften the blow though lol

I would have to agree. It doesn't make any sense at all for folks to buy a new MacBook every year. We're not talking about the market for smartphones, where carriers offer incentives and yearly upgrade promotions.

A computer literally does not change that much year after year. In theory, Apple could introduce the next set of Macs with the M3 processor family, FaceID, OLED screens, and Apple Pencil support - but apparently the folks at Apple aren't competent enough to add these features to a device and actually make it an exciting upgrade instead of something incremental.

 

[Cromulent]

I would have to agree. It doesn't make any sense at all for folks to buy a new MacBook every year. We're not talking about the market for smartphones, where carriers offer incentives and yearly upgrade promotions.

A computer literally does not change that much year after year. In theory, Apple could introduce the next set of Macs with the M3 processor family, FaceID, OLED screens, and Apple Pencil support - but apparently the folks at Apple aren't competent enough to add these features to a device and actually make it an exciting upgrade instead of something incremental.

I mean, I see where you are coming from, but some people rely on speed where a 5% to 10% in speed taken over the course of a year would quickly pay the cost of a new computer every year.

 

[Tagbert]

There’s absolutely no reason for Apple to continue the yearly refresh cycles right now. I hope they shift to a 2 year one. It would benefit both the consumers as well as the environment.

2 years is a little long to ensure that Apple stays ahead of the competition. 18 months might be a more reasonable update cycle. That about how often they have updated the iPads in the past. These are not necessarily design updates where the whole device is changed, nearly an updated SOC.

How would it benefit the environment or the consumers for that matter? Apple updating the chips in its laptops does not force consumers to buy new and discard the old ones. Even for phones that is not the case but even less so for laptops where the replacement cycle is usually several years.

 

[satchmo]

In March 2023 we could get a Mac centric event that will be jammed pack.

--> 14 and 16 inch M3 Pro and Max - Macbook Pro?
--> Mac Mini with M3 Pro?
--> Mac Pro with M3 Extreme?
--> 15 inch Macbook Air with M3?

And a M2 or M3 iMac.

 

[Tagbert]

guys what do you think any chance cellular coming to next gen macbooks ?

I think, eventually we will see that but I suspect that Apple is more focused on keeping the AS line on track. General rumors suggest that Apple has been working on their own cellular modem but that they have run into delays. Assuming that they can surmount those problems, that might be the time that they decide to bring cellular to the MacBooks.

 

[svish]

Now expecting to see an event in March with new Macbook Pros and maybe a new iMac too!

 

[Tagbert]

Transwarp is the drive, not the CPU.

For sure. Clearly the SOC will be the M3 Trinary with the Positronic Engine.

 

[JohnyTango]

They will probably make this a "thing" and hype it up while in fact the screen ration for laptops screens has moved back from 16:9 to 16:10 last year. So they won't be able to get any 13.3" 16:9 and 15.6" 16:9 screens anymore. Taking their 16:10 counterparts you automatically end up with 14/16". About 9-10 years ago the switch was made from 16:10 to 16:9 for laptop screens, I am curious why it is changing back now.