I wonder if there is any truth to the claim that iPhone 14 will use A15 while iPhone 14 Pro/Max will use A16. That's a departure from prior iPhone releases, but truthfully it's not a big deal since even A14 is blistering fast for a phone. The other claim is that they will all get 6 GB RAM, but that iPhone 14 will get LPDDR4X while iPhone 14 Pro Max will get LPDDR5, which is a meaningless difference for most users. Interestingly, there is also the claim that there will be an iPhone 14 Max non-Pro. This translates to this iPhone product grid:
iPhone 14 - A15, 6 GB LPDDR4X
iPhone 14 Max - A15, 6 GB LPDDR4X
iPhone 14 Pro - A16, 6 GB LPDDR5
iPhone 14 Pro Max - A16, 6 GB LPDDR5
My wife is looking for a new iPhone this year, and it seems an iPhone 14 Max with A15 and 6 GB LPDDR4X (if such a machine were actually to be released) would be a perfect upgrade from her 2018 iPhone XR with A12 and 3 GB RAM. Storage probably doesn't matter that much since we use iCloud and I expect even the lowest end (non-SE) model will get at least 128 GB storage.
So, why do I mention this? Because I suspect the Mac mini will follow this as well, getting M2 with two LPDDR4X chips, for a maximum of 16 GB RAM just like M1. However, that would be OK if Apple did actually eventually sell an M2 Pro with 32 GB.
@sublunar suggested the Mn Pro could either be in a Mac mini or in a Mac Studio, but I would guess it would be in a Mac mini, and the 32 GB model wouldn't be that much cheaper than the Mac Studio, pushing the upsell for people to upgrade to the M1 Max Mac Studio.
Right now there isn't much strength in the upsell from the M1 Mac mini to the M1 Max Mac Studio since there is such a huge gap between them. An M2 Pro Mac mini with 32 GB option would make for a much better upsell potential.
This rumoured iPhone model grid with A15 at the low end also lends credence to the idea that the Mac mini could retain M1 at the low end, but I'm personally guessing it will start with M2. Also, if true, it will be nice to see the filling out of the iPhone line, with the new lower end Max option. That portends well for a filled out Mac mini line too.
As I mentioned before, we will know as soon as the Mac Mini gets a redesign what the thermal limits will be - for what it’s worth I think if Apple don’t redesign the Mini then it keeps the door open for M1 Pro in there as the PSU is rated for an Intel i7 with 65w TDP - much more than the current M1 CPU draws.
People needing 32Gb but only an M1 will be an acceptable loss as far as Apple are concerned a mythical 32Gb M1 Mini would cost $1499 but you still only have 2 Thunderbolt ports, 2 USB-A ports, and slightly dodgy Wi-Fi along with gigabit Ethernet.
That extra $500 gets you 10 gig ethernet (yes, not many will use that), loads of ports, expected better Wi-Fi, and a shedload of extra performance.
I don’t think the gap is big enough for Apple to address with their supply chain issues because we all know an M1 Pro Mini would be an instant buy for loads of people who might then be annoyed when the waiting list is gigantic - and might steal from the more popular Macbook Pros.
The point about recycling the A15 CPU for the non Pro iPhones is also a solid one, if Apple redesign the chassis then it gives a new selling point for buyers. The Max size at a more affordable price is bound to sell well.
I imagine a 14 Max would have plenty of buyers who won’t mind that the CPU hasn’t been upgraded (first chance to buy one that cheap) but I believe the small print will be that it would actually use the CPU variant from this year‘s 13 Pro which has 5 GPU cores - more than the regular 13 which has the standard 4 GPUs.
In effect it’s an increase in GPU performance - not just a pure carry over from the standard 13. So the 14 non pro models will be the current 13 Pros with fewer cameras and cheaper materials.
Doesn’t sound so bad when you look at it that way does it?
An iPhone 14 Max will sell exceptionally well since the general smartphone market favors larger phones and this will open up sales for people who wanted a 6.7" iPhone but could not stretch the budget to a Pro Max. I bought the Pro Max primarily for the 6.7" display so I would probably be happy with an iPhone Max, but I intend to continue to stay with the Pro Max since I can afford it and it will have better tech.
As to the non-Pro models sticking with A15, speculation is this is due to both the higher price TSMC will be charging for the A16 (as it will be on the new process) and supply chain concerns in securing hundreds of millions of A16s.
Supply chain concerns are also behind MCK's comments that the 2022 MacBook Air would stay on M1 and therefore the 2022 Mac mini and the 2022 13.3" MBP would be the first M2 models because they sell in such lower volumes compared to the MBA.
Supply chain constraints with M1 Pro might also be why it has not been offered outside of the MacBook Pros while lighter demand for Max on the laptops has allowed Apple to offer it on Mac Studio as the base SoC option.
I had also heard of the TSMC raising prices for the process that the A16 will be built on so it makes sense there too.
In effect the supply chain concerns are going have more than their usual say in marketing activities going forward for a year or two at least and the rumoured amendments to the iPhone plans may inform what happens on the Mac side of things.
I had a look at the deluge of M2 Macs being tested - I’m a bit late to that thread - and my feeling is some or all of those might be testing models as proof of concept. They don’t all have to be scheduled for launch at all and the launch of the Mac Studio might well have meant the axe for the M1 Pro Mini.
If Apple had M1 Max Mac Studio and M1/M2 Mac Mini as options then a certain percentage with upsell to the Mac Studio - if they went with M1 Pro Mac mini as an in between model then Apple could expect that one to sell absolute shedloads but the supply chain might have had words to say about ability to fulfill that order plus taking CPU allocation away from the more profitable 14” and 16” Macbook Pros.
A secondary point would see the M2 CPU being used in the iMac 24” in due course. The power brick can apparently cope with M1 Pro but they would seriously have to release that before any M2 CPUs come out to avoid confusing folks. Perhaps it might be available on a range topping SKU to start with just like the original Retina screen was.
And interestingly, the 4 USB-C ports currently on the back of the mid and high SKU iMacs could all potentially convert to Thunderbolt 4 if M1 Pro were to be used. Would Apple then be persuaded to put M1 Max as an BTO option into the 24” iMac? Maybe it’s a question Apple will answer when the full M2 range comes out in due course.
Perhaps it’s easier to imagine a pricey M1 Pro Mac Mini being plugged into a Mac Studio Display.
The phone theory just strengthens my point about Apple potentially leaving the M1 MBA and Mini around a bit longer as base spec models that can be bought off the shelf. They are going to get bought at the cheap price points regardless.
M2 can be reserved for MacBook Pro 13” and higher spec mini - which would coincidentally mean the final demise of the upper spec Intel Mini. $1099 should buy you 16Gb RAM and 512Gb SSD in an upper spec mini which leaves the traditional $699 and $899 SKUs (8/256 and 8/512) on sale.
If Apple feel they have to tart them up with redesigns to justify continuing with the same old CPU then they could do this:
1. Redesign MBA but keep M1 CPU, could there be scope for higher SKU M2 with 16Gb RAM and 512Gb SSD?
2. Redesign Mac Mini but M1 CPU continues as lower spec SKUs that you buy off the shelf, M2 replaces upper SKU but starts with 16Gb RAM, 512 SSD to raise average selling price.
3. MBP keeps existing design, Touch Bar and all, but gets M2. The model number therefore remains the same.
The design side of things has been rumoured already but if Apple are willing to return to Good, Better, Best sensibility they could simply add top SKU M2 to each of their existing MBA and Mini lines, perhaps even the MBP if they decide to go M2 throughout for that one.
semiconductor.samsung.com
