M3 Rocks! I am super Ready for MacBook Pro 16" M3 Max quiete loaded... M3 with the leaked specifications + Hardware Ray Tracing + GPU new design cores = Super beast ready to compete with Nvidia
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.
Apple's M3 Pro, M3 Max, and M3 Ultra Chips Could Offer Even More CPU and GPU Cores
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
wrong, scaling issue was solved on M2.
M3 will rock
Last edited:
But will these cores go to 11? More cores are great but if they only go up to 10 then what’s the point?
im sure speeds will be super impressive but certainly plan to keep my MacBook Pro 16 for quite a while. Does what I need it to do for now that's for sure. even though it's M1 Pro not noticed much slowdowns for what I use mine for. once I do upgrade maybe will go for more ram
Not only the Studio , but the Mac Pro. If the 'Extreme' is coming no time soon then the Ultra configuration needs to cover more classic Mac Pro ground to stay somewhat relevant. Another P core cluster instead of a 'half' E core cluster is lots more die space, but the charging more also.
Apple isn't necessarily pushing the power consumption up all that much if take some of the savings they get with going to N3B.
The GPU cores (and additonal memory controllers and associated system cache blocks ) are taking up most of the space. Skipping a 'half' E core cluster is a bit of a drop in the bucket. Another full P core cluster is WAY bigger than that. My guess is that it is internal network bandwidth that they are trying to conserve more than die space. The additional P core cluster is pragmatically 'bigger' (consumer) bandwidth hog also. And the GPU cores even more so.
( plus if trying to uncork a full two x16 PCI-e v4 to the backhaul of the Mac Pro ... that also. )
And I’ve just bought a maxed out m2 pro
Doh !
Then again progress is good 👍🏻. Even for mugs like me 😆
Doh !
Then again progress is good 👍🏻. Even for mugs like me 😆
What seems fishy about this to me is the M3 Pro having 6 energy efficient cores and the M3 Max having 4 energy efficient cores and then the M3 Ultra having 8 energy efficient cores. That pattern makes no sense.
You don't get both. TMSC N3 is not going to provide big clock uplift and lower power consumption at the same time. Have to pick one or the other. On real life workloads there will be a mix of times when Apple runs lighter workloads at lower clocks and some bursty workloads at higher ones.
The metrics Apple uses on tech specs page ( showing video) will so far more skew. But that is mainly because most of that workload to shuffled off the CPU codes and onto fixed function logic. ( that likely doesn't need to run at higher clocks at all. )
Again... Apple doesn't have to take much "more power". Two more E cores is hardly going to 'break the bank' for the Mini's thermal cooling subsystem.
Not necessarily a drop in battery life. A same clock speed as M2 the cores on TSMC N3 will deliver a power savings. It depends upon how much clock uplift Apple applies when all 3 P-clusters ( and GPU clusters ) are active.
I do a lot of 2D image editing and for many of the tasks the Ultra beats the 4080; I don't have a 4090 to compare but I would guess the Ultra wouldn't quite match it. Still, considering the price of a 4080 or 4090 and the size/power/heat it's an impressive performance by Apple Silicon. 3D rendering? Yeah that's why I have PCs with the 4080 and A6000. Without hardware raytracing AS GPUs can't keep up.
Yes.
Single-core I believe will be equal to the best Intel processor, maybe only slightly better.
I still REALLY hate that the pro machines come last in apples release schedule. I’m in the market for an M2 Max Studio but its hard to bite the bullet and buy one with M3 so close… cus the m3 mini will prob be faster than the m2 max studio…
Yep, excitedly waiting to see benchmarks. I hope it's more than the ~20% leap from M1 to M2.
On the M3 Max - 4 more CPU performance cores seems like a decent leap.
But the increase of just 2 more GPU cores of the max M3... I guess I just gotta wait and see.
Like the iphone we have finally reached “who cares” levels of performance for portable devices
Crossing fingers for GPU hardware raytracing. They missed it on M1 but back then it was still new. Then the M2 but we knew they wouldn’t stray too far from M1.
They really need to get it out into the M3. Especially when it comes to 3D work. It’s awesome to see Apple getting involved with developing the native Apple Silicon version of Blender but those optimizations can only do so much. Nvidia has showed over and over just how beneficial raytracing can be. Outside of 3D work, hardware raytracing can also be good for certain video editing effects and even sound design.
If the rumors are true, it was supposed to be in the A16 originally so that’s definitely a good sign that Apple is working in that direction.
They really need to get it out into the M3. Especially when it comes to 3D work. It’s awesome to see Apple getting involved with developing the native Apple Silicon version of Blender but those optimizations can only do so much. Nvidia has showed over and over just how beneficial raytracing can be. Outside of 3D work, hardware raytracing can also be good for certain video editing effects and even sound design.
If the rumors are true, it was supposed to be in the A16 originally so that’s definitely a good sign that Apple is working in that direction.
I finally spoiled myself buying a M1 Macbook Pro and these upgrades seem to be flying way faster than intel every did. It's truly amazing to me.
HobeSoundDarryl
macrumors G5
M3 Ultra is two M3 MAX chips spliced together... so that 4 E-cores + 4 E-cores = 8.
If Apple opted to splice 2 PRO chips together for an ULTRA JR, it would have 6 + 6 = 12 E-cores which would really complicate the simple math of "more" desired for each tier... as ULTRA JR would have many more E-cores than Ultra.
If the Extreme chip did exist (rumored to be 4 MAX chips spliced together), that would be 4 times 4 or 16 E-Cores.
This is exactly what I have stated many times before. Apple silicon is amazing. It's a revolutionary advancement of the computer processor. But like any new technology it's hit a major wall.
Apple's upcoming M3 Pro, M3 Max, and M3 Ultra chips could feature more CPU and GPU cores,Bloomberg's Mark Gurman reports.
In his latest "Power On" newsletter, Gurman set out the key changes to the CPU and GPU core numbers of the M3 Pro, M3 Max, and M3 Ultra chips, including how many of the CPU cores are dedicated to performance or efficiency:
M2 M3 Pro 10 or 12 CPU cores (6 or 8 high-performance and 4 energy-efficient)
16 or 19 GPU cores12 or 14 CPU cores (6 or 8 high-performance and 6 energy-efficient)
18 or 20 GPU coresMax 12 CPU cores (8 high-performance and 4 energy-efficient)
30 or 38 core GPU cores16 CPU cores (12 high-performance and 4 energy-efficient)
32 or 40 GPU coresUltra 24 CPU cores (16 high-performance and 8 energy-efficient)
60 or 76 GPU cores32 CPU cores (24 high-performance and 8 energy-efficient)
64 or 80 GPU cores
The standard M3 chip will apparently feature the same CPU and GPU core configuration as the M2 chip, with eight CPU cores (four performance and four efficiency) and ten GPU cores. This chip is expected to be offered in the 13-inch MacBook Pro, 13- and 15-inch MacBook Air, Mac mini, iMac, and iPad Pro.
Apple is also apparently testing MacBook Pro models with 36GB and 48GB of memory, suggesting that new memory options may be available in the future. Currently, the high-end MacBook Pro models can be configured with 16GB, 32GB, 64GB, and 96GB of memory.
Gurman reaffirmed that the first Macs with the M3 chip should debut in October, while Macs with the M3 Pro and M3 Max chips will not arrive until 2024. Macs with the M3 Ultra chip, such as the next-generation Mac Studio, may not arrive until the end of 2024 at the earliest.
Article Link: Apple's M3 Pro, M3 Max, and M3 Ultra Chips Could Offer Even More CPU and GPU Cores
For the forsealble future were not going to get faster processor or fancy new designs. There will be no 1nm CPU chips. Just more cores upon more cores.
Everytime they add new cores developers will have to update or rewrite software to utilize those cores. We find this on the PC side. Where much of the software isn't written to even utilize more than a single or second core. I think with every upgrade cycle apple software developers are going to have to go back to the drawing board to incorporate the new cpu and GPU cores. Or just ignore they are there because the addition of a few new cores really don't advance the speed or rendering or processing any important way.
Cool the GPU has 26 cores.
Does it do anything new? Or it is just spreading the task as hand even wider across those cores. Making their existence even more pointless.
M3 is a big deal. I see it taking a long time to full rollout (must to the detriment of Apple users and no one else), and then being around for a quite a while before any M4 is heard of.
In what?. ( Presuming mean the Mini M3 Pro. The plain M3 ... shouldn't be in same competition as a Mac Studio.)
Single threaded , drag racing? Yes.
Heavy duty GPU workload ... probably not. The Max has twice as many GPU cores. If the M3 generation GPU cores are 20-30% faster there is low likelihood they are going to make up all the ground on twice as many M2 era GPU cores. GPU workloads scale wider and slower quite well. Twice as wide will still hold its ground. It will be closer, but
If had corner case workloads that were more memory contrained than core constraint then perhaps the M3 Pro could snag more traction.
The M3 Pro isn't really all that close. ( If Apple is feeling bigger 'heat' with the MBP 14/16" they may hamstring the Mini Pro update a while. )
The mover for me was migrating to the M series chips. My three M1 based devices are working just fine, thank you.
The biggest system wide improvement was I have one gigabit signals from the cable company (bend over and smile). I upgraded to a 10Gb eight port ethernet hub and Sonnet 10GB to USB-C adapters for the laptops. The MacStudio and Intel mini have built in 10Gb sockets. The Synology NAS has an added 10Gb port adapter.
Pages just pop up on the screen. Backups happen more quickly now.
No need for M2 upgrades (except for my 11" iPad so I could reuse my Brydge keyboard from the M1 model) and will see if the M3 is really useful. Can I discern that an image came up in a blink of the eye vs half as blink of the eye?
I still have my fully optioned December 2019 16" Intel i9 MacBook Pro and 2018 model year i7 Mac mini that are doing their jobs fine. My Intel mini has 10Gb ethernet , 64Gb ram and a 2TB SSD. It is a file server with an attached OWC four drive enclosure which is transfer speed limited due to rotating drives. A M2 Mini Pro would do the job no faster and has less memory for data cache.
The biggest system wide improvement was I have one gigabit signals from the cable company (bend over and smile). I upgraded to a 10Gb eight port ethernet hub and Sonnet 10GB to USB-C adapters for the laptops. The MacStudio and Intel mini have built in 10Gb sockets. The Synology NAS has an added 10Gb port adapter.
Pages just pop up on the screen. Backups happen more quickly now.
No need for M2 upgrades (except for my 11" iPad so I could reuse my Brydge keyboard from the M1 model) and will see if the M3 is really useful. Can I discern that an image came up in a blink of the eye vs half as blink of the eye?
I still have my fully optioned December 2019 16" Intel i9 MacBook Pro and 2018 model year i7 Mac mini that are doing their jobs fine. My Intel mini has 10Gb ethernet , 64Gb ram and a 2TB SSD. It is a file server with an attached OWC four drive enclosure which is transfer speed limited due to rotating drives. A M2 Mini Pro would do the job no faster and has less memory for data cache.