M1 Max to M3 Max are all single-die chips. Why would Apple move from monolithic to fusion at the Max tier?
Last edited:
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.
M4+ Chip Generation - Speculation Megathread [MERGED]
- Thread starter GoetzPhil
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I believe the quote is as follows: "The Donan chip is coming to the entry-level MacBook Pro, the new MacBook Airs and a low-end version of the Mac mini, while the Brava chips will run the high-end MacBook Pros and a pricier version of the Mac mini. For the Mac Studio, Apple is testing versions with both a still-unreleased M3-era chip and a variation of the M4 Brava processor. The highest-end Apple desktop, the Mac Pro, is set to get the new Hidra chip. The Mac Pro remains the lower-selling model in the company’s computer lineup, but it has a vocal fan base. After some customers complained about the specifications of Apple’s in-house chips, the company is looking to beef up that machine next year."
Still clear as mud. The key elements are the use of the plural in "Brava chips" and "a variation of the M4 Brava processor."
The way I read that is they did an experimental M3 variant that would later form the basis of an M4 Brava variant on N3E being tested in the Mac Studio chassis last April. How that might relate to the still-unreleased (until tomorrow) M4 Max is still unknown.
New studio with m4 max and m3 era ”ultra”? Then server grade insane chip for macpro next summer? Last chance to drop some markers to win in tomorrows lottery 😂
What I find interesting is Apple are specifying that the new mac mini is virtually inaudible 5dB (inaudible) under normal use - but that it can dissipate 155W under maximum load.
M4 Mac Mini : 50 inches^3 : 155W continuous : (=3.1 W / in^3)
M2 Mac Studio : 219 inch^3 : 370W continuous : (=1.69 W / in^3)
If Apple optimise the airflow in the M4_MacStudio - could we end up with a 678W enclosure (3.1 x 219)?
If the M4 circuit board in the mini takes less space - would it follow that the M4 Mac Studio also has more space for cooling (if the MS enclosure was the same size).
Even if Gurmans suggestion the next Studio is a larger enclosure (which it might have needed to be if it was based on the M3 Ultra) is wrong - would an additional continuous 300W (=678W-370W) be enough for the M4 enclosure to house 2 x M4 Ultras?
M4 Mac Mini : 50 inches^3 : 155W continuous : (=3.1 W / in^3)
M2 Mac Studio : 219 inch^3 : 370W continuous : (=1.69 W / in^3)
If Apple optimise the airflow in the M4_MacStudio - could we end up with a 678W enclosure (3.1 x 219)?
If the M4 circuit board in the mini takes less space - would it follow that the M4 Mac Studio also has more space for cooling (if the MS enclosure was the same size).
Even if Gurmans suggestion the next Studio is a larger enclosure (which it might have needed to be if it was based on the M3 Ultra) is wrong - would an additional continuous 300W (=678W-370W) be enough for the M4 enclosure to house 2 x M4 Ultras?
I'd very much doubt Apple will increase the size of the Studio, they're far more likely to just throttle back the SOC if there's a heating issue, which I doubt there would be in the Studio.
Where does 273 value comes from? I just seem to be a bit arbitrary but I am sure there is some rationale.
Yes, extremely likely. But leman and I were both talking about the M3. It uses 6P clusters.
No. It's a virtual certainty they would not do that. At that size, you drive up costs and drive down performance, compared to a monolithic chip, to no benefit. What he likely meant was that there's a single design, which is the Max, and when "chopped", you get a Pro. (No actual silicon is chopped; you use part of the mask, and the Pro dies are just smaller.) This is what Apple did with the M1.
8533MT ("LPDDR5X-8533") * 256-bit-wide bus / 8 bits per byte = 273GBps. The Max is likely to double that, barring major surprises.
If the M4 Pro is coming back to be just a chopped version of the M4 Max, this is a somewhat bad news for the Max since it means they share the same CPU performance (unless they drastically employ a different "cutting method").
This will age badly, but anyway: What if there is no M4 Max? What if the M4 Pro is the best you can get in a laptop, and the Mac Studio comes with a fundamentally different chip.
In the M1 generation, some models were downgrades from the maxed-out configurations of their immediate predecessors, at least in some aspects. There is always a risk that Apple decides to do that again, if they determine that some niches are not worth catering to.
Instead of no M4 Max, I was thinking along the lines of maybe there being a surprise tomorrow where after the M4 Max is introduced in the Macbook Pro lineup, that an updated Mac Studio is also introduced with an M4 Max but the M4 Ultra comes to the Studio next year. It's difficult to see how Apple will continue to see a lot of Mac Studio sales with the existing M2 Max until the Studio is updated next Spring.
Yes, who in their right mind would buy a m2max studio when there is a m4pro mini that is faster, has tb5, and is cheaper?
Wasn't it Steve Jobs who said something along the lines of, "if we won't get our own lunch someone else will"?
To me it makes very little sense to not roll out say an M3 Max Mac Studio despite the M3 Ultra not being ready or even not existed. But Apple decided to go that route, letting both Studio and Mac Pro rot at M2 gen.
To me it makes very little sense to not roll out say an M3 Max Mac Studio despite the M3 Ultra not being ready or even not existed. But Apple decided to go that route, letting both Studio and Mac Pro rot at M2 gen.
CPU performance of M4 Pro is already pretty good, 2x M1 Pro means a Geekbench 6 MC score of ~22,000. Close to M2 Ultra.
Apple kept selling trash can 2013 Mac Pro until 2019. I don’t see they having problems keeps M2 Mac Studio around for another year without a price cut. No one in the right mind should buy them though.
Feels like a death spiral. Apple doesn't care to refresh because nobody buys them. And after the Trash Can, the long delay waiting for the last Intel Mac Pro, and the limited memory on the M2 Mac Pro, has the target audience not long since jumped ship to AMD Threadripper Pro workstations?
Even from a businesse perspective I don’t get it. M3max must have been produced in very limited supply as clearly there has been people who would have bought a m3max studio. Now, m3 is obsolete and replaced with m4max so if there is no yield problems then way not just sell the damn thing? Will they really sell more by waiting for 6-9months longer befor a release? And if they didn’t care at all, why not just ditch the studio as a whole? What possible bean-counter logic might be behind this? honestly I can only imagine 2 reasons: 1) being extended bad yields for m3max and knowing they would replace that chip very soon with the m4max. And 2) having a powerul desktop is some kind of legacy sentimentality that they want to drop but there is just hard to let go… anyway, really hope for that mf m4max studio today. Also, make that 32” 6k screen 7k and have at least 10000 lightzones. And the 27” be 120 hz hdr. Is aint 2019 no more
Deadly, it is. Spiralling even faster if considering software creators’ access to non-existing machines. How on Earth they may to — for example — adopt Metal into pro apps if there is no capable units in sight.
Hope that current speed of Apple Silicon developments —when MXPro catches up with M[X-2]Ultra — may bring some fresh air onto that stinky thing.
Last edited:
[My understanding] The goal of the Studio/Pro is to be the ultimate desktop experience with zero compromises on the SoC.
The scientific math is not something i familiar with, so I'll keep it simple.
There is an identity crisis within the Mac team [and iPad] that Apple realized and is slowly trying to fix.
With the release of the M4/M4 Pro Macs, the base and mid-tier options are now the most attractive for the vast majority. The M4 max will push the user base to the more demanding workflows.
As for the Studio/Pro, my prediction is the the Studio will focus on the Ultra chip and the Pro will focus on the "Extreme" These will be chips that will be relevant within a 4-year timespan.
The scientific math is not something i familiar with, so I'll keep it simple.
There is an identity crisis within the Mac team [and iPad] that Apple realized and is slowly trying to fix.
With the release of the M4/M4 Pro Macs, the base and mid-tier options are now the most attractive for the vast majority. The M4 max will push the user base to the more demanding workflows.
As for the Studio/Pro, my prediction is the the Studio will focus on the Ultra chip and the Pro will focus on the "Extreme" These will be chips that will be relevant within a 4-year timespan.
I thought same.
But now, after watching the M4 mini come, i see it from a fresh perspective.
The increase in power is now so big, it *really* creates an urgument. Now it has weight.
Now they can create a certain mass of people just jumping the ship ( is this correct english ? )
while with Macbooks, there is a way bigger consumer base. So they can deliver every single year a fresh model, and can count on it, that so and so many people will get a new one.
This is also about a certain certainity, to *exactly* know that you can sell so and so much.
The manufacturer (apple) has to plan ahead. considering the size of the numbers they have to produce, and considering the size of the possible fluctuation of these numbers, i see now the point, why they went that route.
Leaving out on the M3 generation for the desktops. Makes now sense to me.
i was soooo ready to get me a M3 studio. I can tell ya.
But i´m now even more happy, since they effectivle did NOT screw the M4 Mini-pro concept.
while they screwed the M3pro in my humble opinion.*
* leads even to a fresh thought:
maybe that was their plan from the beginning, with the M4pro allready in mind.
The M3 pro with just 6 P-cores made no sense to me. Wrong idea. => at least vs. a desktop machine.
The M4pro with only 4 E-cores and more P-cores makes so much more sense. (vs. a desktop)
I helps now to enhance that impression that the M4mini-pro is just something.
They will sell tons of those. **
** which leads to an interesting fresh thought:
with what will they surprise us with the upcoming studio ? (much likely in june next year)
I guess they have to put there down now huge weights vs. the development of real GPU power.
Since the M4mini-pro has now allready so much CPU power to deliver. ( that was effectly a big surprise)
@mslilyelise for the win! So pleased they did this! In retrospect, it makes sense especially if no M4 is coming. In my mind, this move practically confirms Mac17,1 and Mac17,2 are the M5 MacBook Air.
Speculation ended: m4max is basically m3 max on another node but clocked higher and some minor tweaks? Tb5 controller being the best part i guess. About 20% faster across all silicon. In a way this is calming since i dropped more than 6000 last year on a m3 max 16 inch that is beyond awesome and now I know that 2025 will be the year Of the desktop (just like desktop linux 🤪) one wonders what that hidra chip will be then and if there will be any max version of the studio at all.
Tb5 enables updated pro display xdr as well with some interesting specs like 7-8k 120 hz 10 bit hdr.
Sad that ther is no actual hidra rumors but maybe you more competent people might have some clue based on the pro and max configs?
Tb5 enables updated pro display xdr as well with some interesting specs like 7-8k 120 hz 10 bit hdr.
Sad that ther is no actual hidra rumors but maybe you more competent people might have some clue based on the pro and max configs?
No core increase for the Max. 546GB/s bandwidth. 128GB max.
Slightly disappointed.
Slightly disappointed.
Last edited:
From their slide M4 Max has 20% perf boost over M3 Max which is quite surprising as that means the per core perf improvement is actually higher than from M2 to M3. TSMC N3B is really not that good if this is the case.
Now that we know M4 Max is 12P + 4E, what does the P-core cluster look like? Does M4 Max have two 6P clusters different from the 5P ones in M4 Pro, or even the 14-core variant M4 Pro has two P cores fused off?
From the “die shot” Apple gives in the press release, can we know whether M4 Max supports UltraFusion?
I still find it hard to believe M4 Ultra, if exists, will be a new design rather than two Max fusion. For such a large chip selling at very low volume, the cost must be too high, no?