M1 Naming Scheme

[Mr. Awesome]

Was not expecting the “Ultra” yesterday. To me it would have made more sense to have M1, M1 Pro, M1 Max, and then M1 Max Duo. That way when we get an AS Max Pro we can have M2 Max Quad. Just a thought, but I think it’d be clearer than the current naming scheme. (To the uninformed, wouldn’t Max potentially sound better than Ultra?)

 

[the8thark]

It is a Max duo in physical design but in terms of what the software sees, it sees just one SoC. The bridge between both sides is fast enough to have it simulate one single SoC. I think that's why it's called Uluta and not Max Duo or whatever.

 

[barry.pearson]

I agree with the naming, M1 Max Duo would be easier to identify as being the improved version of the M1 Max at a glance for anyone not up on their Apple products. It kinda reminds me of old Street Fighter games, let’s hope the Mac Pro doesn’t come out with the Super M1 Max Turbo Ultra Edition EX+ Alpha…

 

[velocityg4]

If the Mac Pro is made with an even chip. They'll have to make it the M1 Ridiculous. So, people know with one word that it is faster than Ultra. If they scale any higher. It'll have to be the M1 Ludicrous and the M1 Plaid.

 

[JPack]

Mac Pro will likely get a chip name like W1, especially since the workstation silicon design cycle is longer.

It won’t be called M1-something, otherwise the naming will get quickly dated by M2.

 

[Mr. Awesome]

It is a Max duo in physical design but in terms of what the software sees, it sees just one SoC. The bridge between both sides is fast enough to have it simulate one single SoC. I think that's why it's called Uluta and not Max Duo or whatever.

True, but from the user’s point of view “M1 Max Duo” is very clearly the step up from M1 Max. Currently, there’s ambiguity regarding which chips are better than which others if you’re hearing just the names.

 

[Mr. Awesome]

Mac Pro will likely get a chip name like W1, especially since the workstation silicon design cycle is longer.

Potentially, but I’d still like to see the consistent use of the M- naming across all the Macs. If Apple did go with “W-“ chips, I would say the M1 Ultra should be the W1, and the Mac Pro chip should be the W1 Pro/Max.

 

[JPack]

Potentially, but I’d still like to see the consistent use of the M- naming across all the Macs. If Apple did go with “W-“ chips, I would say the M1 Ultra should be the W1, and the Mac Pro chip should be the W1 Pro/Max.

I get where you’re coming from, but due to the longer design cycle of workstation chips, it’ll quickly be out of sync. Mac chips likely have an 18-24 month refresh cycle while workstation is likely 24-36 months. Soon, the situation will be “Why is there an W2 in Mac Studio but a W1 Pro in Mac Pro?”

From a practical standpoint, even though Mac Pro workstation chips are likely still based on M1 architecture, they’ll have some significant differences like support for external DIMMs.

 

[GSWForever8]

What’s next, M1 Mega?

 

[darngooddesign]

I think it would be fun throwback if the MacPro gets the M1-Quadra

 

[opeter]

If the Mac Pro is made with an even chip. They'll have to make it the M1 Ridiculous. So, people know with one word that it is faster than Ultra. If they scale any higher. It'll have to be the M1 Ludicrous and the M1 Plaid.

Nah, there are other options, like Amazing, Incredible, Fantastic, Awesome, Magical ... M1 Amazing.

 

[Mr. Awesome]

What’s next, M1 Mega?

I personally like @velocityg4’s suggestion of M1 Ludicrous. ?

 

[cupcakes2000]

True, but from the user’s point of view “M1 Max Duo” is very clearly the step up from M1 Max. Currently, there’s ambiguity regarding which chips are better than which others if you’re hearing just the names.

There is not much ambigunity if you ask me. The fact the Ultra is 4k and the Max is 2k give it away. I think theyre going for the fact that the Max is the best system they offer, but if you want to get mental then there’s is the Ultra. I’m not sure if a better naming system could have been chosen but Duo just sounds dated and terrible.

 

[darngooddesign]

True, but from the user’s point of view “M1 Max Duo” is very clearly the step up from M1 Max. Currently, there’s ambiguity regarding which chips are better than which others if you’re hearing just the names.

Even though M1 sounds like less than "I9 with Turbo Boost", everyone seems to know which is the better chip.

Max Duo sounds like two separate chips, akin to the dual-G4 PowerMacs, instead of a single chip which is more powerful than two separate ones. Any further confusion will be cleared up after a user clicks on Buy Now and sees the price difference. By prominantly listing cores it is easy for a user to understand that 20/48/32 is much better than 10/24/16.

 

[darngooddesign]

I think theyre going for the fact that the Max is the best system they offer, but if you want to get mental then there’s is the Ultra. I’m not sure if a better naming system could have been chosen but Duo just sounds dated and terrible.

I'm looking forward to the M1-Bonkers or M1-InsanelyGreat in the MacPro.

 

[JPack]

Duo and Quad made sense for Intel's marketing team years ago because they were referring to core count.

For Apple, it doesn't make sense to use it to describe packaging technology because that quickly changes. When 3nm or 2nm becomes available, they'll be able to make a 40-core processor without pairing two chips together. At that point, what will Duo and Quad mean?

 

[Reggaenald]

I thought it was strange for Apple to call it “Max” in the first place if it wouldn’t be the max.imum.

 

[JMacHack]

I think Apple’s naming scheme is terrible in general.
“Pro, Max, Ultra” seem like names either thought up by a child or last-minute “this will be fine” names.

Personally I think a better scheme would be to use the “X” and “Z” naming for the Pro and Max, and “Duo” for the Ultra.

It bothers me that the “Pro” is the second lowest entry, the “Max” isn’t the Maximum, and the “Ultra” just sounds juvenile.

IMHO, naming schemes should follow a standard, logical way to decode them.

M -> Mac
1 -> First gen
[blank, X, Z, Duo] baseline performance.

Easy to understand, easy to write, easy to explain, no superfluous information.

 

[satcomer]

Mac Pro will likely get a chip name like W1, especially since the workstation silicon design cycle is longer.

It won’t be called M1-something, otherwise the naming will get quickly dated by M2.

I tend to think Apple with transfer the Mac Pro when the new M2 chip comes! I say they would go back to double chips like they did in past! So until they deveople new M2 you won't see the Mac Pro get updated yet!

 

[darngooddesign]

I think Apple’s naming scheme is terrible in general.
“Pro, Max, Ultra” seem like names either thought up by a child or last-minute “this will be fine” names.

Personally I think a better scheme would be to use the “X” and “Z” naming for the Pro and Max, and “Duo” for the Ultra.

It bothers me that the “Pro” is the second lowest entry, the “Max” isn’t the Maximum, and the “Ultra” just sounds juvenile.

IMHO, naming schemes should follow a standard, logical way to decode them.

M -> Mac
1 -> First gen
[blank, X, Z, Duo] baseline performance.

Easy to understand, easy to write, easy to explain, no superfluous information.

Easy to understand?

Is Duo double the 1, the 1X, or the 1Z?

 

[JMacHack]

Easy to understand?

Is Duo double the 1, the 1X, or the 1Z?

Okay that’s fair, but I still maintain that it’s superior to what exists.

 

[Mr. Awesome]

I thought it was strange for Apple to call it “Max” in the first place if it wouldn’t be the max.imum.

^ This is essentially my thesis here.

I agree that “duo” may not be the best way to tackle the naming, but I think it’s a step up from “Ultra”, and “Max” not truly being the max is just confusing.

 

[cupcakes2000]

The Max is the max though. The ultra is just technically two of them.

^ This is essentially my thesis here.

I agree that “duo” may not be the best way to tackle the naming, but I think it’s a step up from “Ultra”, and “Max” not truly being the max is just confusing.

 

[darngooddesign]

That doesn't bother me any more than the MacBook Air being heavier than the MacBook was. Or that the iPod Mini was not the smallest iPod.

To be fair, the name fits because it was the Maximum when released, and it is a maxed out single M1. Calling it Max helped hide the fact that they were working on the Ultra; everyone expected the next performance jump to be M2-based, and therefore not aimed at professionals, instead of a very powerful M1. Intel probably thought they had a year or two before Apple would roll out the M2-Max. I'll take the slight confusion in exchange for a genuine surprise in this world of every detail being leaked and spoiled.

 

[JPack]

Keep in mind these names were likely selected based on feedback from focus groups.

People of different ages and backgrounds provide their input to a third-party consulting agency.

Much of depends on people's experience and brand recognition. Max may technically mean maximum, but that often doesn't translate in the real world because not everyone's first language is English.