New Apple ASi headless desktop line-up...?

[Boil]

So what if Apple changes the headless desktop line-up...?

Mac mini is now strictly a home for the base Mn SoC...

Mac Studio is now the home for the Mn Pro & Mn Max SoCs...

The Mac Pro line-up is now the only home for the Mn Ultra & Mn Extreme SoCs; this new Mac Pro line-up consists of The Mac Pro tower & rackmount chassis, and has the addition of the all-new Mac Pro Cube chassis...

The Mn Ultra will be a monolithic design at the absolute limits of the TSMC reticle, with 32 CPU cores and the maximum GPU cores it can squeeze in...

The Mn Extreme with be two of the monolithic Mn Ultra SoCs connected via a next-gen UltraFusion...

Obviously, another route for high-end headless desktops SoCs could be like @leman mentions elsewhere on the web, one of a high-performance stacked 3D SoC...

The Mac Pro tower/rackmount will be for end-users who need PCIe slots, the Mac Pro Cube chassis will be for those end-users who do not need aforementioned PCIe slots...

These high-cost SoCs (Mn Ultra & Mn Extreme) will also be utilized for the forthcoming Apple AI servers, powering iCloudAI...

 

[CWallace]

Mac mini use cases are so varied that I believe adding the Pro SoC was a smart decision, even if the price quickly closes in on the base Mac Studio which offers significantly more value.

I do not believe the Mac Studio would really benefit from a Pro SoC option since you would have to pair it with 16GB of RAM to keep the price "low" compared to the current Max SoC + 32GB base model.

As for the Mac Pro, it really exists solely for (the relatively handful of) people who have non-GPU PCIe cards who do not want to run a stack of Sonet ThunderBolt boxes. If it does ever get an "Extreme" SoC option, that could help expand the user base.

 

[Chancha]

I think a lot of these have to do with potential I/O for the given chip.

Having the Pro chip variant on the mini finally lets it have the 4 type-C / TB ports back, which was what it had with the last Intel version. The base M1 M2 mini by comparison looked really lacking in contrast.

With the Studio, if you put just a Pro chip, there won't be enough bus to drive the number of ports. In fact with the Max it already has to downgrade the front 2 ports to just USB not TB4.

Then with the Mac Pro that's where we can all agree it needs a larger chip, or at least one with more potential bandwidth. Having just the Ultra is clearly not enough, compared to what was possible on an Intel MP with its number of PCIe lanes, and also what workstation-class machines out there.

I suppose if Apple increase the PCIe bandwidth potential all over the board for future M series generations, then we may see a down-shift of M chips used in these headless Macs, or maybe even changing ports. But then there will be more demanding I/O down the road to offset the gains, like Thunderbolt5 and higher versions of HDMI / DisplayPort. So we likely will see the same balance of setups as now.

 

[Pressure]

I think a big SoC with "only" a 18-core CPU (6 efficiency and 12 performance cores) and a much larger GPU and NPU would make more sense in a desktop chip for now.

 

[Boil]

Mac mini use cases are so varied that I believe adding the Pro SoC was a smart decision, even if the price quickly closes in on the base Mac Studio which offers significantly more value.

I do not believe the Mac Studio would really benefit from a Pro SoC option since you would have to pair it with 16GB of RAM to keep the price "low" compared to the current Max SoC + 32GB base model.

As for the Mac Pro, it really exists solely for (the relatively handful of) people who have non-GPU PCIe cards who do not want to run a stack of Sonet ThunderBolt boxes. If it does ever get an "Extreme" SoC option, that could help expand the user base.

Mn Pro Mac mini & Mn Max Mac Studio have a negative overlap once one does a single tier upgrade to RAM & storage, at that point it makes more sense to go with the base Mn Max Mac Studio; more ports, faster Ethernet, and faster UMA bandwidth...

I think a lot of these have to do with potential I/O for the given chip.

Having the Pro chip variant on the mini finally lets it have the 4 type-C / TB ports back, which was what it had with the last Intel version. The base M1 M2 mini by comparison looked really lacking in contrast.

With the Studio, if you put just a Pro chip, there won't be enough bus to drive the number of ports. In fact with the Max it already has to downgrade the front 2 ports to just USB not TB4.

Then with the Mac Pro that's where we can all agree it needs a larger chip, or at least one with more potential bandwidth. Having just the Ultra is clearly not enough, compared to what was possible on an Intel MP with its number of PCIe lanes, and also what workstation-class machines out there.

I suppose if Apple increase the PCIe bandwidth potential all over the board for future M series generations, then we may see a down-shift of M chips used in these headless Macs, or maybe even changing ports. But then there will be more demanding I/O down the road to offset the gains, like Thunderbolt5 and higher versions of HDMI / DisplayPort. So we likely will see the same balance of setups as now.

Maybe we will see changes to the M4 Pro & M4 Max which increase ports/bandwidth, thereby making my proposed headless desktop SoC shuffle more realistic...?

I think a big SoC with "only" a 18-core CPU (6 efficiency and 12 performance cores) and a much larger GPU and NPU would make more sense in a desktop chip for now.

The high-end headless desktop SoC offering could definitely benefit from an increase in the GPU core count...!

I guess I have been focused on increasing the CPU core count to the maximum macOS can address, which is 64; but with the move to using GPU cores & Neural Engine cores for tasks formerly relegated to CPU cores, I suppose I could see where maximum CPU core count no longer needs to be a thing...?

Unsure if it would be with the M4-series or the M5-series of SoCs, but maybe we get an Extreme that has:

• 32-core CPU (24P/8E)
• 256-core GPU
• 64-core Neural Engine
• 960GB LPDDR5X RAM (inline ECC)
• 2TB/s UMA bandwidth
• Thunderbolt 5
• WiFi 7
• Bluetooth 5.4
• PCIe 5

 

[theluggage]

With the Studio, if you put just a Pro chip, there won't be enough bus to drive the number of ports. In fact with the Max it already has to downgrade the front 2 ports to just USB not TB4.

Not sure if that's true - I have a Studio M1 Max and, as far as I can tell, the front USB-Cs are connected via the same internal hub as the rear USB-As (which are also present on the Mini).

Mn Pro Mac mini & Mn Max Mac Studio have a negative overlap once one does a single tier upgrade to RAM & storage

The top-tier Mini has a reasonable spec (no 8/256 nonsense) and the two options are there if you just want a binned pro but need 32GB or a full pro and can make do with only 16 - or maybe you're running a MacOS hosting service (where Minis seem to be the go-to) and specifically need the Mini form factor. I don't have a big issue with the idea that "maxing out" the options on one model leaves it costing more than the next model up.

Also, as far as I can tell, the M3 Max MBPs have received at least a $100 price bump over the M2 Max while M3 Pro has stuck at the same price point (OK, so that's what Apple likes to charge for 4GB of RAM but the actual cost of that to Apple is a rounding error and this is all about strategic price points). So when a Mx Max Studio appears I'd expect it to get a price bump c.f. the Mx Pro Mini.

What we know for sure is that Apple changed the way the regular/pro/max cadence works with the M3 - the Pro is no longer a cut-down Max die with the same CPU core config - it has a higher proportion of efficiency cores and while it is still faster than the M2 Pro it has slipped down the performance ladder a bit c.f. the other M3 chips. The Max now has more CPU cores and a higher performance:efficiency ratio and has gone up a rung or two on the ladder.

With less certainty, the M3 Max doesn't appear to include UltraFusion, so the speculation is that there isn't going to be a M3 Ultra and/or the next Ultra chip is going to be another unique die (maybe this will be the 'scalable' one and come in 2- and 4- die versions, rather than the M1/M2 concept of one base design for pro, max and ultra?) - or it could be that M3 was always going to be a brief stopgap primarily to provide an annual bump for the MacBooks and they just didn't bother with Ultrafusion.

So, anyway, yes. of course the desktop range could change - If the M4 Max will run comfortably in a small chassis (and I suspect that, if it works in a MBP it will work in a Mini) then we could see:

Mini: With choice of Mx, Mx Pro or Mx Max processor (c.f. current MacBook Pro range)
Studio: With Mx Ultra (& corresponding price bump)
Mac Pro/rumoured new AI server: with Mx Extreme

It helps to give the current/recent systems their True Names (being satirical, don't over-analyse):

• 24" iMac => Macintosh
• 27" iMac => Mac Marmite*
• Mini M2 => Mac Mini aka. Mac Mini Air
• Mini M2 Pro => Mac Mini Pro
• iMac Pro => 2017 Mac Pro (or was going to be, until Apple showed it to key customers)
• Mac Studio => Mac Pro (as envisioned by the Trashcan designers, but implemented properly)
• 2019 Mac Pro => Mac One and Done aka. "Tide you over while you migrate to Linux or Windows".
• 2023 Mac Pro => Mac Studio PCIe edition aka. "What, after 3 dead-ended Mac Pro concepts you're still here?"

(* Translation from British English: you either love it or hate it).

 

[ondioline]

Yeah I agree, IMO people are projecting too much onto the Mac Pro. They’re not going to create a bunch of exotic, wacky, unique “extreme” CPUs for such a low volume computer that has been perennially abandoned and neglected.

The 2019 never got a CPU upgrade, and got two rounds of updated MPX GPUs for RDNA1/2. Then it was abandoned.

The M2 Ultra Mac Pro is the Mac Studio guts inside a 2019 case.

It’s pretty clear the Mac Studio is the actual “halo product” for their computers.

 

[tenthousandthings]

[Just for fun. I’m not aware of any rumors in this regard.]

Introducing the M4 Mac nano!

The all-new Nano from Apple comes with an external power supply with Ethernet like the iMac, but you can also power it via Thunderbolt on the Apple Studio and Pro displays.

June 2024:

Mac Nano M4
Mac Mini M3 Pro
Mac Studio M3 Max/Ultra
Mac Pro M3 Ultra

Late 2024:

MacBook Pro M4
MacBook Pro M4 Pro/Max (Thunderbolt 5)

Early 2025:

iMac M4
MacBook Air M4

June 2025:

Mac Mini M4 Pro (Thunderbolt 5)
Mac Studio M4 Max/Ultra (Thunderbolt 5)
Mac Pro M4 Ultra (PCIe 5, Thunderbolt 5)

Apple Studio Display (Thunderbolt 5)
Apple Pro Display (Thunderbolt 5)

 

[Basic75]

Introducing the M4 Mac nano!

They should just stick an A17 Pro with 8GB RAM into an Apple TV and allow it to install macOS.