How could they justify that, given the CPU performance will lag behind significantly? I doubt that estimation
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.
Which New Mac Will Apple Release at Its March Event?
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
How could they justify that, given the CPU performance will lag behind significantly? I doubt that estimation
I'm hoping for a relaunch of the 12" MacBook. Even if Apple took the last form factor with butterfly keyboard and 1 port and and only gave it the guts of an M1 MacBook Air, I'd buy it for twice the price.
Expecting a laptop in March. Would like to see the new Macbook Air.
Given the number of iPhone sizes, and iPad sizes, that’s a possibility.
It can do 8K 60Hz just fine, uncompressed. More importantly, I don't think an Apple display is touching anything close to 8K in the foreseeable future.
HDMI 2.1 Feature - 8K60 / 4K120 Resolution
'HDMI 2.1' '8K', 8KTV, 8k@60, 8K Gaming, 8K Broadcast, 8K NHK, 8K Olympics,, HDMI 2.1b
Agreed; it's not a monumental leap and should be easily achievable, but it would be very welcome in many quarters.
I would expect it to cost "about $600" less than the equivalent cheapest MacBook Pro configuration. So maybe starting at $1300-1400 for a binned M1 Pro with 16GB/512GB.
It would go up to well over $3000, with a similar spec (64GB/2TB) to the maxed out Intel Mini above for maybe $3200-3300. However, such an M1 Max Mini (let's assume with 24-core GPU) would be *much* faster than the maxed-out Intel Mini, especially in GPU
As numerous reviewers have stated (Constant Geekery on YouTube is good), the GB5 Metal benchmarks on the M1 Pro and Max are likely unrealistic (too low) because they don't actually put enough load on the GPU cores to actually derive a maximum performance benchmark.
You would be better off looking for benchmarks based on the actual application performance that interests you.
Think of it like current Intel Core vs Xeon lines. Workstations and servers tend to use the Xeons because they scale out to more cores and have some other advantages, but they are based on 2-year old core architectures compared to the Intel Core line.
The Pro / Max are somewhat similar when compared to the M1. I think users that can benefit from multi-core CPU and heavy GPU workloads will not be enormously concerned about single core performance as long as it still competitive and doesn't affect their workloads.
Apple may end up with a fast cadence, e.g. 12 months, but I think Pro/Max is going to lag the base M<x> by 6 months at least.
It's hard to tell based on less than a single iteration, during the pandemic. If M2 arrives next month then M1->M2 will be almost 15 months. M1 Pro/Max to M2 Pro/Max may be similar, but could be longer or shorter. It's too early to tell.
Just can’t see a second generation Mac SoC while there are still Macs with Intel chips being sold. The M1 is the “transitional” SoC, once all variants have at least been announced, then we’ll see an M2. The iMac Pro with an M1 “Ultra” will be released at WWDC, and the Mac Pro with an M1 “Extreme” will be announced at WWDC and released in late Fall. The M2 will debut in a new MacBook in the Fall. The smaller, fanless MacBook will replace the Air, the larger will replace the 13” MBP.
The next event will have…
27” iMac w/ M1 Pro/Max
Mac mini w/ M1 Pro/Max
iPad Air
iPhone SE
…and possibly a high-end 13” MBP with a low-end M1 Pro (8/14)
Yeah not quite Apple’s problem here… macOS is optimized for all those cores, as can be demonstrated by applications that actually do see a 4x increase in GPU performance.
It’s been noted for a while now that GB5 GPU benchmarks are not running properly on these new SoCs.
It can do 8K 60Hz just fine, uncompressed. More importantly, I don't think an Apple display is touching anything close to 8K in the foreseeable future.
HDMI 2.1 Feature - 8K60 / 4K120 Resolution
'HDMI 2.1' '8K', 8KTV, 8k@60, 8K Gaming, 8K Broadcast, 8K NHK, 8K Olympics,, HDMI 2.1bwww.hdmi.org
In link provided under "What type of compression supported":
"... VESA DSC 1.2a also can be used to obtain higher resolutions than 8K60/4:2:0/10-bit color, such as 8K60 RGB, 8K120 and even 10K120. VESA DSC 1.2a also supports 4Kp50/60 with the benefit of enabling operation at much lower link rates. ..."
4:2:0 is also a form of compression since throwing away data. 4:2:2 8k60 RGB would be above 4:2:0/10-bit color . ( similarly if dropped back to 8-bit color would be shrinking data by giving up color space.
They also don't suck up 600 watts. Which is something a surprising amount of people care for.
I actually don't think we'll see the iMac just yet, or any Mac, but if it were the iMac I wouldn't expect it to have Mini-LED. Mini-LED screens seem to be a major concern in terms of supply, and considering a 27 inch screen is four times a 14 inch screen (roughly) that would only amplify this issue with MBP orders having 2 Months backlog already. Same goes for the rumored screens. I simply don't see Mini-LED being the norm on desktop sized screens anytime soon. (Plus I'm not so sure if that is even a bad thing. Not a fan of Mini-LED.)
At this point I wouldn't be too surprised if they pulled an Apple Watch 7 and just release the old iMac with new insides. Not saying this will happen, but the supply chain crisis has finally reached Apple and apparently in full force, and I think simple (and still best in class) IPS panels are much easier to come by. And they kinda have to offer a new iMac at some point (no, the 24 inch living room thing doesn't count).
So 1300 for the base model? Could be about right.
Spending more on Apple Mac products does nothing directly in getting longer support from Apple. Apple's Vintage and Obsolete policies are all based on "last day of sale" and have absolutely nothing directly to do with 'price'. Once withdrawn from sale there is a 5-7 countdown clock started.
Obtaining service for your Apple product after an expired warranty - Apple Support
Learn about your options for getting service and parts for Apple devices that are past their warranty period.
Pragmatically, Apple's inattention to upgrades for the Mac Pro: 3 years (2010-2013) , 6 years ( 2013-2019 ) is what extends the support length window. The willingness to ship something more than several years old gets the longer window; not the price. Apple treating the Mac Pro as a "hobby product" is getting the longer support window rather than price customer pays.
It is somewhat coupled in that folks who pay $30K probably are not coming back to buy something for more than several years either. It becomes a bit of a pricing death-spiral as the higher the price the longer the upgrade cycle .. which leads to higher prices .. which leads to....
10 years on the 2019 will primarily be driven by fact that sat on product until 2022 ( 3 years : 2019 -> 2022 ). The leading edge macOS will probably disappear before that. by the 10 year point on the dregs of the "major security fix only" upgrades. Depending upon how quickly most Mac users retire x86_64 Macs , Apple could quit a year or two sooner than 10.
Paying more just puts more money in the Scrooge McDuck money pit that Apple runs... not extends service life.
( can also tell because they don't let folks explicitly buy super long term extended service either. )
There is a pretty good chance that Apple will prioritize putting ProRes en/decode into the M2 higher than adding more GPU cores. They could go with the "small size" ProRes en/decoder from the A-series. However, if targeting the big video en/decode of the M1 Pro/Max into a M1-class die that would be about same space that 1-2 GPU 'cores' would take up. And Apple would be 'done'.
Similarly if add AV1 to the decode abilities. ( consumption trumping GPU core count increase ).
Ditto for the NPU cores if doing something with AI/ML upscaling. The display processing on M1 was a bit under powered to (number of displays supported went down from the Intel iGPUs. )
Going from TSMC N5 -> N4 is about a 6% increase in transistor budget if keep the die at the same size. Better caching ( GPU , CPU , and/or NPU ) , ProRes, display processor , and better Ai could blow most of that whole budget increase.
The M2 still probably has to fit inside of a iPad Pro, so they probably are not looking for a die size bloat.
Can get some performance and power utilization efficiency uplift from the minor shrink too. So same core count would move the performance numbers up. Same number of cores , but substantively 'better'. But other specific stuff had higher Perf/Watt bang for buck in those silos . (which happen to dig a bigger moat around the Apple ecosystem. )
Last edited:
That’s not gonna happen. M2 is going to be slower than the max and the pro but faster than M1.
Also Apple is not going to release an iMac with the Max or Pro, they will release it with M2, same for the Mac mini. The M1 pro and Max are only for pro devices so they’ll be exclusive to MacBook Pro and Mac Pro
Last edited:
I feel like this should be covered by consumer protection law.Spending more on Apple Mac products does nothing directly in getting longer support from Apple. Apple's Vintage and Obsolete policies are all based on "last day of sale" and have absolutely nothing directly to do with 'price'. Once withdrawn from sale there is a 5-7 countdown clock started.
Obtaining service for your Apple product after an expired warranty - Apple Support
Learn about your options for getting service and parts for Apple devices that are past their warranty period.support.apple.com
Pragmatically, Apple's inattention to upgrades for the Mac Pro: 3 years (2010-2013) , 6 years ( 2013-2019 ) is what extends the support length window. The willingness to ship something more than several years old gets the longer window; not the price. Apple treating the Mac Pro as a "hobby product" is getting the longer support window rather than price customer pays.
It is somewhat coupled in that folks who pay $30K probably are not coming back to buy something for more than several years either. It becomes a bit of a pricing death-spiral as the higher the price the longer the upgrade cycle .. which leads to higher prices .. which leads to....
10 years on the 2019 will primarily be driven by fact that sat on product until 2022 ( 3 years : 2019 -> 2022 ). The leading edge macOS will probably disappear before that. by the 10 year point on the dregs of the "major security fix only" upgrades. Depending upon how quickly most Mac users retire x86_64 Macs , Apple could quit a year or two sooner than 10.
Paying more just puts more money in the Scrooge McDuck money pit that Apple runs... not extends service life.
( can also tell because they don't let folks explicitly buy super long term extended service either. )
I can't see Apple launching an iMac Pro with the M1 Pro/Max processor, as the 2017 Intel based iMac Pro model (that was discontinued last year) is still faster in both CPU and GPU scores.
Umm, there is a history with Apple’s silicon nomenclature… Ax, Sx, Hx, Wx, Tx
First letter is the “family”, the number is the generation. Why would they change this naming scheme just for the Mac? I do see your point about there possibly being a second “desktop” family of SoCs. However, next gen. Mac SoCs will more than likely be M2 and it will be based off A16 gen. cores, not A15.
That’s my guess.
when the mac mini got a redesign? decades...so if the mac mini comes with that redesign that people talked then...Mac mini with M1 pro/max can have a special 5-10min presentation on March 8th
Last edited:
It just doesn’t make sense to release an M2 product with so many other machines still on Intel processors. If they release a Mac in the March event, the safest bet is adding the M1X to an existing model of some sort.
Yes, the Intel mac mini probably will get replaced in March, the bigger intel imac in June, and thats it, since Apple wants to keep Intel Mac Pro probably for another 1-2 years along side with the apple silicon
Doubtful towards the "that's it" in regards to the debut of the ASi Mac Pro (Cube), the transition will not be complete until all Macs are using Apple silicon...
- M1 Pro/Max Mac mini (Pro) desktop - Late Winter/Early Spring Event 2022 (rumored/speculated for March 8th)
- M1 Pro/Max 27" iMac (Pro) all-in-one desktop - WWDC 2022
- Dual (possible Quad) M1 Max Mac Pro (Cube) - preview @ WWDC, release by end of 2022
iMac Pro 18 cores : 1148 Single. 14069 Multi
iMac Pro (Late 2017) - Geekbench
Benchmark results for an iMac Pro (Late 2017) with an Intel Xeon W-2191B processor.
browser.geekbench.com
iMac Pro. 14 cores : 1112 Single. 11942 Multi
iMac Pro (Late 2017) - Geekbench
Benchmark results for an iMac Pro (Late 2017) with an Intel Xeon W-2170B processor.
browser.geekbench.com
iMac Pro 10 cores : 1169 Single. 9655 Multi
iMac Pro (Late 2017) - Geekbench
Benchmark results for an iMac Pro (Late 2017) with an Intel Xeon W-2150B processor.
browser.geekbench.com
MBP 16" Max : 1778 Single. 12743 Multi
MacBook Pro (16-inch, 2021) - Geekbench
Benchmark results for a MacBook Pro (16-inch, 2021) with an Apple M1 Max processor.
browser.geekbench.com
In single threaded, it isn't faster. For multiple only the 18 core is really a clean win. If the new iMac Pro (M1 Max) is $1.5-2K cheaper than the 18 core then I doubt many folks are going to complain about that. There is no indication that Apple is going to try to match the price of the old iMac Pro entry point here. Which should make adding. $700+ for BTO M1 Max configuration probably landing lower than the
[ The screen is likely less than what folks are thinking it will be driven up over 2K for the entry iMac Pro, but no where near $4K. ]
Folks who had a mix of multi and single workloads drifted mainly to the 8 and 10 core models. ( e.g. Adobe apps ) . For iMac Pro the higher core count the single scores dropped.
GPU wise also... knock a thousand off the price and a healthy number aren't going to complain.
Folks pushing lots of ProRes Video won't even blink at buying. ( if offload the video en/decode from the CPU and/or GPU, then it won't matter the GPU can't hit the same "compute" benchmark score. ). Also points to why Apple has been hyperactive in driven software vendors to optimize specifically for Apple's GPU with native Metal. (no 3rd party GPU support on M-series and folks have nothing else to do but optimize for just one GPU family. )
There is a corner case of folks who bought: 256GB RAM , 18 core Xeon , Vega64X GPU systems , but that was no where near the majority of users. And a decent number of those folks probably looked at a Mac Pro 2019 in the past year or so if needed to "trade up" due to increase workload. Eventually, Apple's "half sized" Mac Pro will be used to target this subset. ( if there is a Max Duo then Multi score falls and the GPU probably does too in most cases. )
The "half sized" Mac Pro isn't going to cover the top end BTO options for Mac Pro 2019 either. Two 6800 Duos. , 1TB RAM , and 28 cores ... probably not on a fair number of workloads.