That would require Apple to source 16GB modules (since they always use 2 for the base M1/2) and I doubt there is much of a market for 32GB in an entry level product. Even the the 2x12 they offer now seems quite a bit high.
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.
Two Unreleased Macs Spotted in Steam's Database
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
That would require Apple to source 16GB modules (since they always use 2 for the base M1/2) and I doubt there is much of a market for 32GB in an entry level product. Even the the 2x12 they offer now seems quite a bit high.
But that's what will happen. You/we will get the M2 Mac mini, that will have the same characteristics as the M2 Macbook Air and MBP 13" minus the screen and keyboard. Maximal RAM support will be 24 GB.
That probably means that these distinctions are not important to you. Alternative labels like M2-1, M2-3, M2-5 and M2-7 would be just as meaningless...
Which is fine – not all of us need to remember every detail all the time! Read an explainer when you want to buy a new machine, then feel free to forget.
I remember when apple used to make new products, software and services yearly. Now people see iMac revision 14 and 15 and fall asleep. Riding the wave until it finally beaches and fades away. 11 years of the most boring and problematic products ever. Apple 1990's all over again. 12 different versions of the same product but with a twist to basically play mind games to make you pay $4,000-$10,000 for the top end version. Such a lame company now.
What’s even more unfortunate is the fact this ain’t bad relative to the industry. Have you tried figuring out what AMD’s chip designations mean? Let alone Qualcomm. Intel’s i3/i5/i7/i9 scheme sort of makes sense, but that might just be because they’ve been around forever. Nobody seems to know a good way to name chips.
And what, pray tell, would you want them to do that isn’t boring? People buy Macs to use Macs—they wouldn’t spend $4,000 on something if they wanted something different. Probably the most radical change I would appreciate in a Mac is maybe a touchscreen, which is really boring these days.
Agreed! Just let 32-bit compatability be an 'addon' like rosetta2, so those who dont need it or dont want to install it dont have to!
I'd argue that a progressive number system at least implies relative strength
Which of "Max", "Pro" or "Ultra" is actually best? or even which is #1, #2, #3 in the heirarchy?
Who knows? lol
The CPUs in Apple silicon Macs don’t even have a 32-bit mode. Rosetta 2 is actually capable of running emulated/translated x86 32-bit software. The problem is that Apple no longer ships 32-bit libraries. To do that as a plug-in would take a huge effort. It’s never going to happen.
Last edited:
You know you can game on a computer without expressly buying it FOR gaming, right?
Lol keep waiting, Apple already had and has gaming capable hardware, but still game studios are not interested.
I'm waiting for the $50.000 M2 Extreme Mac Pro with 3 x Apple Studio Displays for gaming.
Personally, I've got my eye on an Apple Silicon Mac Pro Super Pro Ultimate Ultra Extreme Intermediate Junior. 
It's not that you buy it *for* gaming, it's that the experience isn't painful/impossible if you choose to also game on the Mac that you purchased for photography, video, podcasting, writing, CAD, etc.
I didn't buy my first Mac for gaming. But I sure as hell enjoyed playing Dark Forces and a handful of other games on it.
I didn't buy any of my PowerBooks for gaming either. But, really enjoyed Diablo II on one of them.
Hell, I ran iRacing on BootCamp on one of my Intel MBPs w/ a single screen.
Thank you.
I've used the tools analogy for years.
Some people prefer different tools.
Some tools are better for some tasks.
Some people are left handed, you don't force them to use right handed scissors, or vice-versa.
And, yes, one of the tasks that WinPCs will continue to lead in, will be gaming. But, that doesn't mean that gaming needs to be painful or impossible on the Mac. As I said above, I didn't buy my first Mac for gaming, but sure as hell enjoyed playing Dark Forces on it.
Good times.
None of my previous Windows desktop PCs were built for gaming either. They simply could run games as well.
Personally, I've got my eye on an Apple Silicon Mac Pro Super Pro Ultimate Ultra Extreme Intermediate Junior.
You don’t want a MAX plus?
You miss the point. Folks whose primary interest is gaming and fully into pre-2023 gaming of course continue to roll-their-own PC boxes sucking mains wattage, with heat output to heat a city block. Those folks are a specific group, and of course Macs are currently inappropriate for their needs.
It is not about buying a Mac for gaming. It is about buying a Mac for all the many reasons folks buy Macs (4th biggest selling PC brand) - - then also using that Mac for ganing sometimes. Most likely playing 2023 games specifically written or ported to run on Apple SoC.