M1 Pro or M1 Max for these tasks

[TheDurbie]

I'm planning to upgrade to the 14' Macbook Pro, but not sure what CPU to get I'm planning on getting the M1 Max with 10-core CPU and 32-core GPU. But, I might be fine with the M1 Pro with 10-core CPU and 16-core GPU. I will use the notebook for editing in 4k/1080p for youtube and edit in Final Cut Pro/Premier Pro

Sometimes I will use Photoshop, Java 8 game design in Eclipse.

I'm not sure if I should get the 14" or the 16" since I've seen them both in person and wouldn't mind having one of the two.

I'm wondering if you think the following specs would be enough for my use case, or if you think I should go for the M1 Pro?:

14" M1 Max Macbook Pro - 32 GB memory/1 TB SSD

 

[jav6454]

Just to let you know that an M1 Max on the 14" chasis runs a bit hot.

 

[GrumpyCoder]

You should probably be fine with a Pro unless you do some large 4k editing projects with a ton of color grading and maybe exotic codecs. Other than that, as pointed out already, the Max in the 14" is running on it's limit. It's already clocked a little lower than the version in the 16", fans will come on sooner, will spin about twice as fast, reach about 49dB(A) vs. 37dB(A) on the 16" and you will take a hit on the battery life. If none of this bothers you, go ahead. But I think the Pro is a perfect match for the 14".

 

[TheDurbie]

You should probably be fine with a Pro unless you do some large 4k editing projects with a ton of color grading and maybe exotic codecs. Other than that, as pointed out already, the Max in the 14" is running on it's limit. It's already clocked a little lower than the version in the 16", fans will come on sooner, will spin about twice as fast, reach about 49dB(A) vs. 37dB(A) on the 16" and you will take a hit on the battery life. If none of this bothers you, go ahead. But I think the Pro is a perfect match for the 14".

Hmmm I'll take that into note. The 4k videos I edit are 8 - 20 minutes usually and I don't use that much special effects.

 

[TheDurbie]

Just to let you know that an M1 Max on the 14" chasis runs a bit hot.

That's good to know

 

[GrumpyCoder]

Hmmm I'll take that into note. The 4k videos I edit are 8 - 20 minutes usually and I don't use that much special effects.

No problem with the Pro then. It'll just take a little longer to export, that's all.

 

[TheDurbie]

No problem with the Pro then. It'll just take a little longer to export, that's all.

Thanks for the information, best I could find all day

 

[GrumpyCoder]

Thanks for the information, best I could find all day

Sure thing. Here's some more info for videos. I think for 20 minute videos, the Pro is totally fine taking a little longer. It's for the 16", but it translates to the 14" as well.

 

[jav6454]

Sure thing. Here's some more info for videos. I think for 20 minute videos, the Pro is totally fine taking a little longer. It's for the 16", but it translates to the 14" as well.

Not bad video. Real world testing and in the end, the results show that the M1 Pro is a cash saver and does the job well. If I were chasing between either the Max or Pro, I'd take the Pro and use the saved money on something else.

 

[GrumpyCoder]

Not bad video. Real world testing and in the end, the results show that the M1 Pro is a cash saver and does the job well. If I were chasing between either the Max or Pro, I'd take the Pro and use the saved money on something else.

Indeed. There is a benefit for the Max with 3D work, rendering, simulation and games. But certainly not for Java based games, more like Unity/Unreal and native Metal. Other than that, the Pro is totally fine. ?
I personally went for the Max with 24 GPU cores (16"), but I have to dig into Unity/Unreal all the time, mostly Windows/Linux, but every now and then macOS. I probably would have been fine with the Pro as well.

 

[TheDurbie]

Indeed. There is a benefit for the Max with 3D work, rendering, simulation and games. But certainly not for Java based games, more like Unity/Unreal and native Metal. Other than that, the Pro is totally fine. ?
I personally went for the Max with 24 GPU cores (16"), but I have to dig into Unity/Unreal all the time, mostly Windows/Linux, but every now and then macOS. I probably would have been fine with the Pro as well.

I think the Pro 16 Core GPU will fit my needs

 

[jav6454]

Indeed. There is a benefit for the Max with 3D work, rendering, simulation and games. But certainly not for Java based games, more like Unity/Unreal and native Metal. Other than that, the Pro is totally fine. ?
I personally went for the Max with 24 GPU cores (16"), but I have to dig into Unity/Unreal all the time, mostly Windows/Linux, but every now and then macOS. I probably would have been fine with the Pro as well.

I just don't see the need to own a M1 Max. For me that is.

 

[TheDurbie]

I just don't see the need to own a M1 Max. For me that is.

Yeah for me I didn't know if I would need a high end M1 Pro or a low end M1 Max

 

[jav6454]

Yeah for me I didn't know if I would need a high end M1 Pro or a low end M1 Max

In your case, initially it was hard for me to recommend one given I know little of how effective having twice the amount of accelerators was. But after seeing the video review, I'd say you're better off with the Pro.

 

[TheDurbie]

In your case, initially it was hard for me to recommend one given I know little of how effective having twice the amount of accelerators was. But after seeing the video review, I'd say you're better off with the Pro.

I wish I could watch the video but since I'm on vacation right now the Wi-Fi speed is 0.21MB for download :/ But, I can watch the video in about three days.

 

[jav6454]

I wish I could watch the video but since I'm on vacation right now the Wi-Fi speed is 0.21MB for download :/ But, I can watch the video in about three days.

In short, the video stated that the differences between a fully enabled Pro and Max M1 was not as substantial as it seems on paper even with the extra cores and extra accelerators.

 

[TheDurbie]

In short, the video stated that the differences between a fully enabled Pro and Max M1 was not as substantial as it seems on paper even with the extra cores and extra accelerators.

I've noticed that Apple's "claims" can be true but in a way nobody would use. For example Apple says the 16" Macbook Pro gets 21 hours of battery life. Yes it does, but only if Wi-Fi is off, True tone is off, Brightness low, and watching Apple's recommend pack on Apple TV downloaded to the disk. Apple is really good at making claims that are true but, only true if you use it how nobody would.

 

[jav6454]

I've noticed that Apple's "claims" can be true but in a way nobody would use. For example Apple says the 16" Macbook Pro gets 21 hours of battery life. Yes it does, but only if Wi-Fi is off, True tone is off, Brightness low, and watching Apple's recommend pack on Apple TV downloaded to the disk. Apple is really good at making claims that are true but, only true if you use it how nobody would.

Yes they do that several times. However, the claims on their MBA or 13" MBP are solid. I get very close to what Apple states.

 

[TheDurbie]

Yes they do that several times. However, the claims on their MBA or 13" MBP are solid. I get very close to what Apple states.

They probably did that for the MBA and MBP 13" since M1 was the first chip Apple made that beat Intel by a lot. Apple probably used their misleading claims for M1 Pro and Max, since when you make something powerful it's harder to make it even more powerful. Which could be why Apple falsely made the M1 Max look better than it really is, or for the money.

 

[jav6454]

They probably did that for the MBA and MBP 13" since M1 was the first chip Apple made that beat Intel by a lot. Apple probably used their misleading claims for M1 Pro and Max, since when you make something powerful it's harder to make it even more powerful. Which could be why Apple falsely made the M1 Max look better than it really is, or for the money.

Well, the battery claims for the Pro and Max were a bit exaggerated when I saw them given that Apple did away with 2 of the efficiency cores. That right there rang an alarm bell for me.

As per how much better it is in processing, I can actually believe Apple as the differences between the M1 and the Pro/Max lines are the more performance cores and the accelerators for media. That right there can push the Pro/Max to reach better performing numbers. Albeit, at the cost of real world battery life.

 

[TheDurbie]

Well, the battery claims for the Pro and Max were a bit exaggerated when I saw them given that Apple did away with 2 of the efficiency cores. That right there rang an alarm bell for me.

As per how much better it is in processing, I can actually believe Apple as the differences between the M1 and the Pro/Max lines are the more performance cores and the accelerators for media. That right there can push the Pro/Max to reach better performing numbers. Albeit, at the cost of real world battery life.

True, since with the better PPW it can have amazing effects. The M1 Pro/Max is way better to M1. It's like when computers went to ssd with quad core, it feels like that jump again.

 

[jav6454]

To be fair, going from an HDD to an SSD feels like night and day.

 

[TheDurbie]

To be fair, going from an HDD to an SSD feels like night and day.

The feeling of the transition from HDD to SSD is just like the feeling of Intel to M1

 

[jav6454]

The feeling of the transition from HDD to SSD is just like the feeling of Intel to M1

That is true, and I bet right now someone's head (or heads) at Intel are being sent to the guillotine due to them loosing Apple as a customer. Then again, their arrogance, complacency and stupidity caught up to them.

 

[TheDurbie]

That is true, and I bet right now someone's head (or heads) at Intel are being sent to the guillotine due to them loosing Apple as a customer. Then again, their arrogance, complacency and stupidity caught up to them.

Intel has caused Apple a lot of issue, like how Intel had shipping issues causing Apple to have the same effect. And how Intel's heat efficiency is non-existent.