Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
It would be wise for Apple to differentiate their chips based on intended use. I do photo editing and videography so having a chip with better raw performance is important. My M1M Studio is perfect for this. But someone that does coding may benefit more from a different chip arrangement. It’s not just “more better faster” anymore. Chips are becoming more use-case specific (AI, graphics, ray tracing, etc) and I’d like to see that reflected in Apple SOCs.
Exactly. I only need the performance of an M3 Pro, but I’m heavy into multi-tasking because I wear a lot of different hats in my job and in my personal hobbies so I jump between a lot of random apps during any given day.

I would’ve purchased the M3 Pro with 48GB memory if it was available, and then upgrade it in 4-5 years, but all it comes with is 36GB which is a weird amount. So I go up to the M3 Max 14/30 and couldn’t get it with 48GB, just 96GB for $800 more. So I go up to the 16/40 M3 Max for $300 more and get 48GB. Well at that point it’s only $200 more to get 64GB (which is an insane amount of money for only 16GB of memory but I digress) so I get the 64GB and now I’m going to keep it for 6-7 years instead of 4-5 years.

I don’t think Apple is making any more money off of this madness. They’re just killing future Mac sales by 1. Delaying upgrade cycles because people end up buying more computer than they need or 2. They’re pissing people off with these upgrade ladders where you can’t quite get the one thing you need for your job or hobby without shelling out ungodly amounts of cash and people will think long and hard about going with Apple next time at these prices. Their SSD prices are especially disgusting. I know that I came really close to not even upgrading and I had been planning for a long time to migrate off of Intel three generations in. I wouldn’t have done it if I hadn’t learned about Swappa in these forums and sold my old Macs for good money to pay for this ridiculously overpriced machine.
 
Exactly. I only need the performance of an M3 Pro, but I’m heavy into multi-tasking because I wear a lot of different hats in my job and in my personal hobbies so I jump between a lot of random apps during any given day.

I would’ve purchased the M3 Pro with 48GB memory if it was available, and then upgrade it in 4-5 years, but all it comes with is 36GB which is a weird amount. So I go up to the M3 Max 14/30 and couldn’t get it with 48GB, just 96GB for $800 more. So I go up to the 16/40 M3 Max for $300 more and get 48GB. Well at that point it’s only $200 more to get 64GB (which is an insane amount of money for only 16GB of memory but I digress) so I get the 64GB and now I’m going to keep it for 6-7 years instead of 4-5 years.

I don’t think Apple is making any more money off of this madness. They’re just killing future Mac sales by 1. Delaying upgrade cycles because people end up buying more computer than they need or 2. They’re pissing people off with these upgrade ladders where you can’t quite get the one thing you need for your job or hobby without shelling out ungodly amounts of cash and people will think long and hard about going with Apple next time at these prices. Their SSD prices are especially disgusting. I know that I came really close to not even upgrading and I had been planning for a long time to migrate off of Intel three generations in. I wouldn’t have done it if I hadn’t learned about Swappa in these forums and sold my old Macs for good money to pay for this ridiculously overpriced machine.
Same here! I just want the M series pro chip model but the prices for more gigs of ram is a bit much and as you mentioned the ssd prices are steeply priced.

I mentioned earlier in this thread that they need to increase the entire MBP line with their unified memory (ram) by 8gigs for each base model. Then if someone still needed to increase from there they could get a step up or the new highest amount like 48gigs on the pro chip like you said.

I personally wonder if the rumor we had earlier this summer is not possibly meant for the M4 lineup of chips when it came to increasing the gigs of unified memory. We'll just have to wait and see of course.
 
Great article. Small trade-offs with M3 Pro but the extra efficiency cores should give improved battery life
 
The M3 Pro sure looks like a laptop-optimized chip, totally unsuitable for a Mini or iMac, though I bet Apple still sells those desktops with an M3 Pro. The 6-9 month delay I'm expecting before desktop M3s are released is rather annoying though, none of the M3 laptops appear to be suitable for monitors like the 57" Samsung G9 Odyssey.
Neither the Mini nor the iMac have fully blown desktop cooling systems. The M3 Pro is perfect for them.
 
  • Like
Reactions: KeithBN
Exactly. I only need the performance of an M3 Pro, but I’m heavy into multi-tasking because I wear a lot of different hats in my job and in my personal hobbies so I jump between a lot of random apps during any given day.

I would’ve purchased the M3 Pro with 48GB memory if it was available, and then upgrade it in 4-5 years, but all it comes with is 36GB which is a weird amount. So I go up to the M3 Max 14/30 and couldn’t get it with 48GB, just 96GB for $800 more. So I go up to the 16/40 M3 Max for $300 more and get 48GB. Well at that point it’s only $200 more to get 64GB (which is an insane amount of money for only 16GB of memory but I digress) so I get the 64GB and now I’m going to keep it for 6-7 years instead of 4-5 years.

I don’t think Apple is making any more money off of this madness. They’re just killing future Mac sales by 1. Delaying upgrade cycles because people end up buying more computer than they need or 2. They’re pissing people off with these upgrade ladders where you can’t quite get the one thing you need for your job or hobby without shelling out ungodly amounts of cash and people will think long and hard about going with Apple next time at these prices. Their SSD prices are especially disgusting. I know that I came really close to not even upgrading and I had been planning for a long time to migrate off of Intel three generations in. I wouldn’t have done it if I hadn’t learned about Swappa in these forums and sold my old Macs for good money to pay for this ridiculously overpriced machine.
And the funny thing is, 36gb of ram would have been completely adequate 😂
 
It would be wise for Apple to differentiate their chips based on intended use. I do photo editing and videography so having a chip with better raw performance is important. My M1M Studio is perfect for this. But someone that does coding may benefit more from a different chip arrangement. It’s not just “more better faster” anymore. Chips are becoming more use-case specific (AI, graphics, ray tracing, etc) and I’d like to see that reflected in Apple SOCs.

"25% FASTER" just isn't that much faster.

I like to upgrade generationally.... like, 200-300% speed increases.
 
In the meantime I am still doing full time Web Development and making money on my Mac Mini 2011 (i7 Dual Core, 16GB Ram, SSD). I can build Wordpress websites like breeze, C# & .Net Core with Visual Studio Code, Python, Open Office, Opera, Filezilla, Gimp, Darktable and edit photos from my EOS 90D (33MP) with ease. I understand the security risks from lack of patches of my High Sierra. I will definately gain by upgrading to a newer Apple M Series . But I cannot stomach the current prices for a simple 16GB ram and 512GB storage. Until Apple decides to launch 16GB and 512GB HDD as basic I won't splash my money on an Apple product. By the way I have just splashed EUR900 for an ASUS ZenBook with 13th Gen Intel Core, 32GB RAM, 1TB SSD, OLED Screen and SD Card slot for my wife. This price is half of what I pay in my country for a MacBook Air with 16GB Ram and 512 SSD.
 
Last edited:
I guess I’ll wait for the M4. For me, as a programmer, these upgrades don’t really offer enough over the M1 Pro.

In particular, I would like to see faster storage and IO.

Apparently the top MBPs do around 5-6000 MBps for reads and around 6500 MBps for writes. Modern PCIe4 SSDs can beat that by quite a large margin, and we’re even starting to see PCIe5 drives which roughly double those speeds.

For IO, I want to see Thunderbolt 5, which again doubles the speed of Thunderbolt 4. That means more external monitors at higher refresh rates, faster external storage, etc.

Other than that, single-core performance is important to me. A lot of programming tasks benefit from that more than they benefit from cores.

The M3 seems okay, but it’s also more of an incremental improvement. Those stack up, of course, so that when I finally do upgrade, I’ll get all of them at once, but at least for now I don’t find it irresistible.
 
I'd be interested to see a comparison between the base M3 and M2 Pro.

Meanwhile, I put my money where my mouth is and just ordered a Mac Studio with base M2 Max chip and 64 GB of RAM. I have no doubts about the machine holding me for at least five years. I’m not a true power user but want more than the base M3 chips. I strongly considered a Mini with the M2 Pro but the price with 32GB of RAM and a 1TB SSD was very close to the Studio.
 
No. "the fact they are still releasing new models with 8 GB base RAM" does not mean "even the first M1 Macs with 8 GB should do fine for years and years to come."

Apple offers RAM up to 128 GB right now for a reason. The suggestion that "8 GB should do fine for years and years to come" for anything but lowest-end workflows is inappropriate.
I disagree.

There is a reason Apple release Macs with 8 GB right now. Because for a lot of people 8 GB is sufficient, and will be for years. Also, Apple can get away with it... It's a business decision for them. And these will be on Apple care for 3 plus years...

The reason Apple offer up to 128 GB on some Macs is because some workflows require that much RAM... it's not there to ensure your Mac runs for longer. If you're buying a Mac and only buy more RAM option in the belief it will mean your Mac will run longer than base model of that same release... well you're wasting your money, big time.

Also, my Intel Mac on 8 GB RAM is doing fine.. from 2020 and I expect it will be fine for another 2 or 3 years. Not once have I had an issue with the amount of RAM.. regular consumer use, coding, office 365... and thats not a low end workflow.. its a light workflow..

Users spec their machines as per requirement...

Its amazing on these forums.. no other company could elicit such passion and opinions 😆
 
Last edited:
My boring version of the article:

The base M3 is far superior to every Intel Mac. It's an easy choice.

For anyone buying a new MacBook Pro or iMac, the M3 is the best choice unless you find a substantial bargain by buying an older model.

For those that already use a modern M1 or M2-based Mac, the M3 is decidedly better. However, the cost/benefit is strictly dependent on the apps you use. Most people would not upgrade a newer M1 or M2 based Mac unless they have a specific, known need based on their workflow.
 
My boring version of the article:

The base M3 is far superior to every Intel Mac. It's an easy choice.

For anyone buying a new MacBook Pro or iMac, the M3 is the best choice unless you find a substantial bargain by buying an older model.

For those that already use a modern M1 or M2-based Mac, the M3 is decidedly better. However, the cost/benefit is strictly dependent on the apps you use. Most people would not upgrade a newer M1 or M2 based Mac unless they have a specific, known need based on their workflow.
It's an easy choice except if your current Intel Mac is running fine... and you can either save that money, or buy something else that you really need. Intel Macs are still useful for a lot of ordinary users.

There was another guy on these forums elsewhere that said their current Mac was fine, until they came across more disposable income... that was a puzzler.. but we can all be confident Apple will love more of his hard earned cash 😂
 
  • Like
Reactions: Razorpit
Since I have no need for a laptop, I'm waiting for the M3 Studio Max (or probably M3 Studio Ultra.) I'm still on a 2017 iMac Pro (upgraded with an eGPU,) but the current OS (14) is probably the end of the line for this iMac. I've held off for the 3nm M3, and 2024 is probably the year.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Chuckeee
There is a huge market for used Apple gear. I could have easily sold it locally for $700 in cash within 30 minutes. Trade ins are very easy, but there are real costs to it.
So, then I will plan to sell my used M3 iMac on-line for a new M4 iMac! If I can get $700 in a couple of years then my new machine may only cost $599 ! Super thanks !! But wait, since iMacs skip a generation then that maybe an M5 iMac.
 
You’re right of course. But many people just don’t have time to sell on eBay - or the patience to deal with the hassle of being a seller there.
Plus, you often don't even get as much as you think you're gonna get - There are no guarantees and you also have to deal with everything that goes along with it, which is why there are so many nightmare stories out there.
 
Plus, you often don't even get as much as you think you're gonna get - There are no guarantees and you also have to deal with everything that goes along with it, which is why there are so many nightmare stories out there.
Plus, eventually, it may not get recycled properly ... now I think I'll just go with Apple's Trade-In program again!
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.