Sorry, I have a tendency to be blunt or rude when I try to reduce my words. This is not personal! So please excuse me if it seems I am being aggressive.
No worries.
The M4 is a more efficient chip. Evidence is clear - battery life has been extended by 10%, the batteries are the same, and the processors are quite a lot faster. They are a lot more efficient, hence cooler.
So - we should have now established that the previous binned Pro M3 Max processor ran hotter than today's M4 Max binned processor.
I think m4 pro and m4 max are different to the base m4. For instance only m4 pro and up chips have tb5. I'm not convinced m4 pros/max run cooler, I think we have to wait and see. While they may be cooler, it may also be that Apple has pushed those higher end chips harder given their use case.
While stated battery life has improved that is claimed in tasks they are pretty energy efficent at. That is probably to say, that the efficiency cores may run cooler and better able to do streaming video with the dedicated media engine. But that does not mean they are more energy efficient when doing large renders, ai tasks, gaming or other tasks which really push the chips.
However we could order 64 or 96 GB RAM with the M3 Max binned processor. But not now. We are capped at 36 GB.
It's all about profit margins. To get more RAM, you have to buy a more expensive processor.
Personally, i think its more likely about how many SKUs they want to offer. Also its not clear to me they could increase the ram without increasing the memory bandwidth to match the unbinned max. The binned m4 max is a very interesting machine, I'm curious how it benchmarks, because its possibly the all round performance value in the pro-range. I am torn between currently thinking the binned max is the best value and the worst. For 3d work, its 50% extra power (and if form factor is not a key factor) you can get a 14 in m4 max 36gb 1tb for the same price as a 16 inch m4 pro 1tb 48gb. I think that 50% extra GPU and extra media engine, could be a real boon for 3d work, games and renders, and possibly not matter much for AI.
I find it interesting they are doing 36gb, not 48 like every other model. Perhaps what ever ram module size they had last year that made them offer 18 and 36 options, they have enough left in inventory to fill these machines, but cost has improved on the modules they use to make up 24/48gb configurations that they have become preferred.
So I guess I agree its for profit margins, but on the supply end, not the force consumer to upgrade end.
Also consider the Mac mini M4 Pro is very tight in packaging, it does not even have a fan, yet we can buy 64 GB RAM for it. But with a duel fan 16" Mac M4 Pro, its maximum RAM is 48 GB.
I dont think the ram is causing or easing the heat, so the fact you can get 48 or 64gb doesn't convince me of anything.
I'm also pretty sure i've seen it confirmed that the m4 mac minis have a fans.
Here is another example: you cannot buy an 8 TB drive with the standard M4 or the M4 Pro processor. If you want 8TB, you have to buy an M4 Max processor. Do you think that an 8 TB drive runs hotter than 4 TB one?
It's all about forcing those who want RAM or storage to future proof their computers, to pay extra for the privilege. Apple would rather we replace our computers because as time goes forward, Memory requirements increase, so if we save money on RAM, we are actually probably bringing the replacement requirement forward. Which suits Apple very nicely.
M4 Mac Spec page:
See all the technical specifications for the 14- and 16-inch MacBook Pro with the M4, M4 Pro and M4 Max chips.
www.apple.com
No i dont think the 8tb drive runs hotter.
I think probably even Apple thinks that offering 8tb at their upgrade prices looks ridiculous on entry level machines. So would be both an unpopular model and look bad.
It's also possible that they have extra ssd pads on the max chip, so they can only offer it on the max variant.
Again the whole point was about the stock configs they offer. I see two plausible reasons for why they dont offer the unbinned m4 max on the 14 inch as a stock configuration:
(1) they felt it wouldnt be a very popular configuration, people who want that more likely to get a 16, and they need a limit on stock configurations for good inventory management;
(2) they consider the unbinned m4 max may be more likely to throttle and have a non ideal performance in the 14 and so they dont want to push it as a standard option. This is unlikely, but given there were some cases where the 14 inch max chips have throttled in the past, its plausible.
For 1, if you think they were only trying to force the most profit. Then the answer would be to make the unbinned m4 max chip the stock configuration and the binned chips the BTO. People are impatient, plenty would cave on the full m4 max if it meant they could get it sooner.
