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.
The M3 lineup is so weird
- Thread starter MF878
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
You're absolutely right I compared the air 13 m2 with the 14 pro and the 16 pro and read the 16 pro number. Good catch. Thank you. Still thats a big weight penalty and the price difference of £250 is significant enought that I'm wondering what I'd be paying for. I have a 40 inch 5k monitor so I dont need the ability to plug into more than one monitor. For a real uplift in power or ram I have tyo go to the base pro max which will cost an extra 650 pound or 850 pounds for the 12/18 version. Thats a significant gain for essentially a ram increase of 12gb and a questionable bump in performance and a fan. The most sensibel thing at this poit would be to seek out an apple refurb m2 air 13 inch with 24gb and a 1tb ssd but there be unicorns!
Last edited:
The iMac only getting the M3 tells me that there will either be some sort of pro iMac coming next year, or they are just driving their pro customers away from the All-in-one market completely.
I still don’t understand why mac mini couldn’t host a max chip while macbook pros can lol. And the chassis was fine during the intel period. It would be a killer product
You are wrong. Where I work, we provide either Dell Latitude or MacBook Pro laptops and prices are very similar for a similar configuration. Depending on someones role they get either Dell (for example Finance, back-end developers) or Mac (Marketing, front-end developers) or choice (management and some technical staff). Dells are usually leased in bulk (3 year lease) and when returned to Dell they probably end up on Dell Refurbished site. MacBooks are usually purchased, again in bulk, and after 3 years sold to some large refurbisher to end up on Amazon or somewhere. I got work issued mid-level 2020 Intel 13" MBP (16/512 with 4 thunderbolt ports) almost 3 years ago and it will be replaced with 14" MBP in a couple of weeks.
On a separate note, most (large) businesses will choose Intel laptops over AMD as Intel has more business features (vPro, thunderbolt docking ...).
I do not even have my head wrapped around RAM choices on M3 Pro and Max. Actually, I don’t even think I have it wrapped around CPU and GPU cores yet either. The way the binned Max skips middle tiers of RAM, it’s a lot to actually think about to config what you need. And the 8, 12, and 16GB multiples too. Oh and memory bandwidth….. yes, this is a very convoluted lineup
I haven’t seen a good explanation of the M3 Max RAM choices. My guess is that the binned and full-fat chips have different numbers of channels available for RAM (I.e., the RAM controllers are also binned).
M3 Max binned:
36GB = 6 channels x 6GB
96GB = 6x16GB
M3 Max:
48GB = 8x6GB
64GB = 8x8GB
128GB = 8x16GB
This would mean Apple skipped a 48GB choice on the binned chip (6x8GB)…
Seems accurate, but must be frustrating for some that they skipped offering 48GB.
Absolutely agreed. The configuration choices and release line up choices (e.g. no airs - they could have aligned everything) have annoyed the hell out of me. Am thinking of buying an m2 air fullly loaded
Looks like this was a good guess. The binned M3 Max has 300GB/s memory bandwidth and the full-fat M3 Max has 400GB/s.
Agree, but I do think that has to do with production capacity of M3 though. Once the initial sales of these machines happen and orders go down, then they’ll release those. From all the supply chain info, I think they are making as many M3’s as possible and that’s why they have to stagger releases.
You could well be right but the configuration choices are still bizarre compared to previously.
I thought thinkpads were good ...at least among the choices in the PC world. I guess that was in the IBM days until Lenovo jumped on board.
Because that would directly undercut sales of the Mac Studio. Apple's marketing strategy for their standalone machines is the Mac Mini has the BOTL chip, the Studio has the middle-ground chips (Max/Ultra), and the Mac Pro has the TOTL chip (Ultra/Extreme).
What I can't get my head round is why iMacs have the BOTL last-generation SOC and have never had an option for Pro or Max chips. Well I do get it, really. Apple purposefully levered demographics like me (who once bought a 2011 27" 3.4GHz i7 iMac with 16GB RAM) towards a Studio Max with a Studio Display. But in a way it kinda backfired for them in my case, because instead of me buying a £3,400 27" iMac I bought a £2,000 Studio and a 28" £250 other-brand 4K monitor which meh does the job because I'm not a visual creator I'm an audio-guy.
Last edited:
that's where I am - I've been putting off a personal purchase Mac for sometime, but now it's time to jump in (as my way overspec'd work-provided MB 14 M1 is getting locked down).
I wanted to wait for the M3 iMac & then see how it stacks up against comparably priced laptops. For c. £2K there are now very many options at my preferred spec (16GB / 1TB) within close comparison across M3 iMac, M2 MBA 15" £1,849 and both M3 & M3 Pro MBP 14" ...
I'll likely buy an M3 Pro MBP 14" with 18GB / 1TB for £2,119 on Education Pricing. Plus it'll be black 😂
They could reuse mac mini’s form factor and rebrand it, the wow factor will be a lot more than a bulkier mac studio.
And iMac is weird
I think it was Jason Snell who said the lineup has kind of been "reset" - so you have that base machine which is there to satisfy those who just want a MacBook Pro for the name or ports or screen but don't have a demanding workflow. M3 Pro is now the workhorse for most people. Then the M3 Max for those who absolutely need the fastest performance.
That kinds of makes sense - it does get a bit messy with the configurator and the cores, but at least we all have options now. And if you're buying a MBP, chances are you know why you're buying one and what specs are your priority for your workload.
The original example about the Max only being $400 more than an M3 Pro is true, but I know in the past I've preferred a Pro over a Max as I don't need the max performance and prefer a chip that runs cooler and has improved battery life.
Again, I think its great we have the choice and we're now in a place where even the MacBook Airs are incredibly capable machines for lots of users.
That kinds of makes sense - it does get a bit messy with the configurator and the cores, but at least we all have options now. And if you're buying a MBP, chances are you know why you're buying one and what specs are your priority for your workload.
The original example about the Max only being $400 more than an M3 Pro is true, but I know in the past I've preferred a Pro over a Max as I don't need the max performance and prefer a chip that runs cooler and has improved battery life.
Again, I think its great we have the choice and we're now in a place where even the MacBook Airs are incredibly capable machines for lots of users.
Too many chips and too many product lines.
Apple cares more about filling a product for every price range. But i think ti's fair. it' simportant to keep in mind apple is global and that different products may appeal to different people in different countries.
Apple cares more about filling a product for every price range. But i think ti's fair. it' simportant to keep in mind apple is global and that different products may appeal to different people in different countries.
What I hate is how a RAM upgrade which used to be a simple, cheap thing in the past, has become something to really think long and hard about. Not only can you not upgrade it, but it's also incredibly, ridiculously, mind-bogglingly expensive. You could buy a cheap Windows laptop for the price of an Apple RAM upgrade. I thought things were meant to get cheaper with Moore's law and all.
I just don't want to reward Apple for their stupid pricing.
I just don't want to reward Apple for their stupid pricing.
