I urgently need a new laptop and I don’t need faster speeds compared to the m1 or m2. However I would guess the m3 macbooks will be +/- 10% cheaper (at least in Europe) following the cheaper apple tv, iphones and apple watches of this year.
I would guess highly unlikely the M3 will be cheaper. But there is a much better chance you could get a better deal on a M1/M2 either from the refurbished store or that are retained in the product line as lower cost entry level alternatives after the M3 is released.
I actually find it more likely since "pro" users want more power, for the average person the difference between M1 and M2 to M3 is not going to be very big. It would also be cheaper for Apple to bin M3 Pros and M3 Max to sell them as M3s later
I doubt that. The plain, pro, max and ultra version have different physical dye sizes, chip physical dimensions and varying pin out. You would not be able to drop in one for another just based on binning. Unless you made all chips have same dye footprint as an ultra chip, and the would drive up costs (fewer dyes per wafer).
IF you could get by with an M2 Mini, you didn't actually need an M2 Studio.
I suspect that many people who bought M2 pro mini would have bought M2 max studio if they were both available last January. (Currently the M2 max studio is often presented as a better alternative value as compared to the the M2 mini pro - an easy up sell).
I could see this as a lesson leaned by marketing/sales and would justify releasing the M3 MacBooks Pro 14 and 16 first. From a marketing perspective it makes sense to offer the higher end first since it will drive those customers on the fence (on which model to purchase) into buying the higher end product. From a production and engineering viewpoint that seems backwards but from sales and marketing it makes sense.
Last edited: