Apple Announces New M3 Chips, Cuts Price of Entry-Level MacBook Pro (theverge.com) 164
At Apple's "Scary Fast" event today, the company unveiled a refreshed 24-inch iMac, entry-evel MacBook Pro that ditches the Touch Bar, and its latest "M3" in-house chips. The Verge reports: As expected, Apple's M3 chips took the spotlight during this month's event. The new lineup includes the M3, M3 Pro, and M3 Max chips, which Apple says mark the "first personal computer chips" made using the more efficient 3-nanometer process. In addition to offering a "faster and more efficient CPU," the trio of chips comes with an updated GPU that supports ray tracing, mesh shading, and Dynamic Caching -- a feature that optimizes the amount of memory the device uses during tasks. Apple's M3 chips offer up to 128GB of unified memory, with the most powerful M3 Max chip coming with up to 92 billion transistors, a 40-core GPU, and a 16-core CPU.
The new 24-inch iMac is getting an M3-flavored upgrade that Apple says offers two times faster performance than its M1-equipped predecessor. Along with the new chip, the refreshed iMac features a 4.5K Retina display with more than 1 billion colors, support for Wi-Fi 6E, and a 1080p webcam. The iMac also offers up to 24GB of unified memory and comes in seven colors: green, yellow, orange, pink, purple, blue, and silver. There are also color-matched accessories that come with the iMac, but they still feature Lightning connectors. The 24-inch iMac costs $1,299 with an eight-core CPU or $1,499 with a 10-core chip. You can preorder it starting today, with availability starting on November 7th.
Alongside the M3 Pro and M3 Max-equipped MacBook Pro models, Apple is releasing a cheaper 14-inch MacBook Pro that comes with the base M3 chip and starts at $1,599. The device replaces the 13-inch MacBook Pro with an M2 chip that Apple released last year and offers performance that's up to 60 percent faster. The Touch Bar model is being discontinued, which means it's all physical keys from here out. There are some drawbacks to this entry-level model, though: it features a meager 8GB of RAM and comes in just silver and space gray variations -- the black color is exclusive to the higher-end MacBook Pros. The device is available to preorder today and officially launches on November 7th.
The new 24-inch iMac is getting an M3-flavored upgrade that Apple says offers two times faster performance than its M1-equipped predecessor. Along with the new chip, the refreshed iMac features a 4.5K Retina display with more than 1 billion colors, support for Wi-Fi 6E, and a 1080p webcam. The iMac also offers up to 24GB of unified memory and comes in seven colors: green, yellow, orange, pink, purple, blue, and silver. There are also color-matched accessories that come with the iMac, but they still feature Lightning connectors. The 24-inch iMac costs $1,299 with an eight-core CPU or $1,499 with a 10-core chip. You can preorder it starting today, with availability starting on November 7th.
Alongside the M3 Pro and M3 Max-equipped MacBook Pro models, Apple is releasing a cheaper 14-inch MacBook Pro that comes with the base M3 chip and starts at $1,599. The device replaces the 13-inch MacBook Pro with an M2 chip that Apple released last year and offers performance that's up to 60 percent faster. The Touch Bar model is being discontinued, which means it's all physical keys from here out. There are some drawbacks to this entry-level model, though: it features a meager 8GB of RAM and comes in just silver and space gray variations -- the black color is exclusive to the higher-end MacBook Pros. The device is available to preorder today and officially launches on November 7th.
a meager 8GB of RAM (Score:5, Informative)
So 8GB of RAM is now meager? Not long ago it was plenty because ARM used so much less RAM than Intel!
$200 to upgrade to 16GB so at apple 8GB is $200 (Score:2, Informative)
$200 to upgrade to 16GB so at apple 8GB is $200 what a rip!
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
Apple isn’t installing additional RAM chips — the RAM in the M-Series processors is baked directly into the CPU die. It’s SiP, and IMO it’s not exactly unusual that that is going to cost more than commodity RAM sticks.
Yaz
Re: (Score:2)
It's probably cheaper.
But since you can't upgrade yourself, they can charge what ever they like.
Re: (Score:3)
Apple isn’t installing additional RAM chips — the RAM in the M-Series processors is baked directly into the CPU die. It’s SiP, and IMO it’s not exactly unusual that that is going to cost more than commodity RAM sticks.
Yaz
Actually, assuming the M3 is similar to the M2 Die shown below, the Main RAM is not physically located on the SoC Die! Rather, It is located in separate RAM Dice Bonded onto the Hybrid Package that is an Mx-Series "Chip". To do as you suggest would be economic suicide!
https://www.mirabilisdesign.co... [mirabilisdesign.com]
Re: (Score:2)
False. Memory in a Mac uses "RAM chips" just like every other PC. How they are installed is different.
Re: (Score:2)
mod parent up (Score:2)
Unified memory on the same die as cpu and gpu is a whole lot better than a ram stick in the far side of a bus controller
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
$200 to upgrade to 16GB so at apple 8GB is $200 what a rip!
The Macbook Pro M3s use LPDDR5. $200 is not as bad as you think, it's only bad when you compare it to standard off the shelf DDR modules for your PC which almost certainly have no place to be used (nor the space for it) in this device.
Re: (Score:3)
You can upgrade the RAM. See tutorials on youtube. You need to have a few tools like hot air gun, bga rework station, microscope.
Re:$200 to upgrade to 16GB so at apple 8GB is $200 (Score:4, Interesting)
$200 to upgrade to 16GB so at apple 8GB is $200 what a rip!
And yet, I've love for you to describe for me how this is some kind of 'new' scam.
At what age should we expect the new generation to actually learn? Is it toddlers, or should we start targeting those in diapers now? A US President selling the benefits of diapers, wants to know...
Truly.
Apple has charged $200 per RAM Upsell for quite a bit, now. At this point, how can that rate any Comment? If GP wanna whine about something relevant to these new machines, like "Why still no 27/32 inch iMac?", then by all means, Post!
Mods: Parent is Not "Troll"; rather, "Insightful".
Re: (Score:2)
"And yet, I've love for you to describe for me how this is some kind of 'new' scam."
It's not, it's a commentary on Apple's bad faith fanbase.
"At what age should we expect the new generation to actually learn? Is it toddlers, or should we start targeting those in diapers now? A US President selling the benefits of diapers, wants to know..."
You're 3 years out of date. It was the previous President that wore diapers. Apparently, whatever the age we cannot expect you to learn.
Re: (Score:3)
And yet, I've love for you to describe for me how this is some kind of 'new' scam.
The new(ish) aspect is that if you think you can beat the system by ordering the low-end model and upgrading it yourself with aftermarket RAM, you'll be sorely disappointed.
Thank you for describing my entire fucking point, and why (my company) bought my last Apple product (Mac Mini) in 2012. I could still upgrade the hard drive and memory with trivial effort back then (which I did, 16GB or RAM and an SSD), before the days of modern consumer fuckery.
Those of us armed with even a consumer level of stupidity understood how Apple worked back in the day vs. now. I've still got my Apple IIc my parents overpaid for, as a reminder. And I build PCs for this very reason.
Re: (Score:2)
I was confusing the two...
Re: (Score:2)
So 8GB of RAM is now meager?
Well, yeah. These days even high-end smartphones are available with more RAM than that.
Re: (Score:2)
How does smartphone memory matter to a laptop? What has changed that makes 8GB "meager" now when it wasn't then? It's been only 3 years.
Re: (Score:2)
How does smartphone memory matter to a laptop?
They're both computers, running similar hardware and software architectures. Smartphones are constrained by form factor to be more careful with resources, though, so you'd expect smartphone and laptop memory to track on similar curves, with smartphones having less.
Re: (Score:2)
Those Chrome/Edge tabs are not getting any smaller. I'd say that 16 GB is minimum, if not 32 these days.
Re: a meager 8GB of RAM (Score:2)
On Windows computers, sure. But I highly doubt youâ(TM)ll notice a 200MB tab getting swapped in and out to an SSD running at 8GB/s.
Re: (Score:2)
Because magic?
We highly doubt YOU'D notice, sure.
Re: a meager 8GB of RAM (Score:2)
CPU Architecture has a minimal impact on memory usage (at least if using the same bit width for pointers and integers!). On modern CPUs the amount of RAM occupied by instructions is pretty small compared to image assets, sound samples, user data and the like.
That said x86-64 has a pretty compact instruction stream, and likely is more compact then traditional ARM instructions which are all 32bit wide and
Re: (Score:2)
They "chews up memory fast when you do anything graphics wise" when the M1 was introduced as well, it's just that people like you ignored it then because 8GB is what most Macs got.
Re: (Score:3)
You do know that most "traditional laptops" come with an integrated GPU as well, so that there is no difference?
Re: (Score:2)
You do know that most "traditional laptops" come with an integrated GPU as well, so that there is no difference?
Apparently what you do not know is there is a world of difference between the anemic integrated GPUs of Windows laptops, and the GPU that Apple is providing - Apple's system GPU has much faster access to the memory (and lower latency) than the integrated GPU in windows laptops because RAM and CPU and GPU are all on the same chip with the memory... in the Apple system adding memory is basically like adding GPU memory capacity in a system with a traditional graphics card, not putting more memory for the GPU on slower bus access.
Do yourself a favor and read up on the M series chip design. Or just computer hardware design in general.
This GPU's got Moxie!
Can't wait to see the M3 Ultra. . .
Re:Not the same (Score:5, Informative)
Citation please
How about common sense? The RAM is located on the same SOC as the CPU and GPU. Of course it will be faster than other integrated laptops where the RAM is located on the MB in a separate module.
No it's not. Adding a graphics card adds dedicated memory bandwidth for graphics ONLY, adding memory to a Mac adds no bandwidth at all.
Um, you missed his point. You cannot easily add more GPU RAM if you have a separate GPU card. For the average consumer, you can only replace the card with another that has more RAM. If you are skilled enough with soldering you might be able to increase the RAM on a GPU card but that is not an easy thing to do. Increasing the unified memory increases the GPU memory for the new Macs. It is the same with any system with integrated graphics; however, there may be technical limitations like the GPU is limited to only a portion of the new memory.
Slower access FOR THE CPU, faster access FOR THE GPU.
Um what? Neither the CPU nor the GPU has to access the PCIE bus for memory as they are part of the SOC. That was his point. While SuperKendall's fan boyism sometimes ventures on delusion, he is not wrong about these technical details.
Re: (Score:2)
You cannot easily add more GPU RAM if you have a separate GPU card.
There have been GPUs with upgradable memory in the past, mostly way back in olden times from 3dlabs. And of course before then there were non-3d graphics cards with upgradable memory. But making a graphics card like that today means including too much hardware most users will never use, and also socketed memory is less reliable than soldered, so nobody is making cards like that any more. It's not impossible, it just doesn't make business sense given how much of the cost is the RAM.
Apple's integrated approac
Re: (Score:2)
That is 8GB of shared memory in a world where anything 1080p or less is now pretty much considered low or standard res.
On the flip side what everyone here seems to be overlooking is that for $200 more to go to 16GB, you are upgrading ram not just for the CPU but also GPU. It may be expensive but you get more value out of a RAM upgrade on these systems than you do with traditional laptop RAM upgrades.
Good point!
Re: (Score:2)
>On the flip side what everyone here seems to be overlooking is that for $200 more to go to 16GB, you are upgrading ram not just for the CPU but also GPU. It may be expensive but you get more value out of a RAM upgrade on these systems than you do with traditional laptop RAM upgrades.
On the flip side of *that*, this means the CPU and GPU are sharing RAM. You don't have 16GB for your GPU and 16GB for your CPU you have 16BG (or 8 at the min!) TOTAL. 8 GB does seem a bet anemic when looked at that way.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
"you are upgrading ram not just for the CPU but also GPU."
Makes it even WORSE. Not only is the base 8GB but that's for GPU AS WELL!!! Way to spin a negative into a positive. Something SuperKendall would do.
And Apple didn't invent UMA, they just pretended it was an improvement.
Also, what "everyone here seems to be overlooking" is that people like you spewed the lie that 8GB was plenty when the M1 was introduced.
Re: da fuq you talking about (Score:2)
Besides compression and deduplication, more efficient coding and compiling, the SSD is faster and RAM also has a lot higher speed being directly integrated on the chip, so these chips use the RAM effectively as L4 cache and the SSD as a static RAM for things that donâ(TM)t need to be loaded in frequently. Even Dell still comes with 8GB options in many businesses, if all you need is a simple reliable business laptop, you probably donâ(TM)t need more than that.
Re: (Score:2)
SSD is faster than what? I know you're trying to suggest it is faster than RAM without actually saying it, good thing.
But nice job repeating the old talking points. Now tell us about how the 8GB M1 Macs didn't prematurely wear out their SSDs.
Re: (Score:2)
SSD is faster than what? I know you're trying to suggest it is faster than RAM without actually saying it, good thing.
He did not say SSD is faster "than". He said "SSD is faster AND RAM is . . .". AND is a coordinating conjunction creating a compound sentence.
Re: (Score:2)
Faster than your average NVMe or SATA SSD definitely. As far as wearing out, not sure what you're talking about, the higher quality SSDs (Samsung, Intel, Kioxia) all do SLC caching on the chip and a quality chip can rewrite its entire contents daily for a decade without wearing out.
Re: (Score:2)
I have 32GB of ram on a M1max. I average about 10gb of app memory with about 3GB of it being wired. I've rarely hit higher. I use it to write code, produce my own music, and play some video games like BG3.
Widens range (price wise) (Score:4, Interesting)
Not a lot there in my opinion, was surprised they did an whole "event" around this release.
Of note is that as one model got a little cheaper on the low end, on the high end you can now spend $7200 on a fully specced 16" MacBook Pro.
One interesting side note is the whole event was filmed on an iPhone 15 Pro Max (noted at the very end in closing text).
Re: (Score:2)
Retina is all well and good, but the window I'm typing this in still fills most of the screen.
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
You do understand that the 16" is physically the same size as the old Intel 15" MacBook pros, right? Just checking.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
I'm aware the bezels are smaller, are you saying the 16" only has a 15" screen? Because I'm interested in screen size, not overall size; I wouldn't give a toss if a new 15" MBP was an inch wider than that.
This is for a 2019 model; but nicely compares the 15" and 16" MBP screens vs. case-size. I think it's significant:
https://9to5mac.com/2019/11/14... [9to5mac.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Read again. Carefully. The 16" MacBook Pro is (roughly) the same size as the older 15" Intel MacBook Pros. The laptops are physically the same size (roughly). The 15" and 16" are a measurement of the screen size. In other words, new laptop with 16" screen is the same physical size as the old laptop with 15" screen.
Re: (Score:2)
That would mean bigger bezels.
Yes and as I said, I wouldn't care. I'm talking as someone who bought a 15" because the 17" was too expensive and the former was quite adequate. Now the models are 14"/16" and I don't want to pay the extra £1k for a usable screen size. If/when my mid-2015 MBP dies I'll probably end up with a 15" Air.
Of course if OSX let you scale the UI I wouldn't have this problem.
Oh FFS. I really feel like an idiot now. When did they add UI scaling to OSX? I'm not complaining, just wish I'd known about it sooner. Mu
Re: Widens range (price wise) (Score:2)
They added it before they renamed OS X (OS ten) to macOS. I seem to remember some options being hidden: maybe you had to hold down the option key before opening the display settings, then you got a whole list of possible resolutions.
My 2019 16" MBP is roughly the same size as my mid-2014 15" MBP, but a lot easier on the eyes at full HD resolution.
Re: (Score:2)
You do understand that the 16" is physically the same size as the old Intel 15" MacBook pros, right? Just checking.
You DO understand that $7200 is insane to pay for any laptop, right? Just checking on the the-fuck-is-WRONG-with-you fanboi status here...
Re:Widens range (price wise) (Score:4, Interesting)
You DO understand that $7200 is insane to pay for any laptop, right? Just checking on the the-fuck-is-WRONG-with-you fanboi status here...
Do YOU understand that $7200 is the price for the maxed-out model? As in the M3 Max with 16 CPU and 40 GPU cores, 128 GB of RAM and 8 TB SSD?
How much would you pay for an equivalent non-Apple configuration?
Re: (Score:2)
I dare you to price it out and get back to me. YOU are the one throwing down the challenge, so back it up. I dare you.
Re:Widens range (price wise) (Score:5, Interesting)
I dare you to price it out and get back to me. YOU are the one throwing down the challenge, so back it up. I dare you.
You don't seem to understand logical fallacies, because you respond to a comment about screen sizes with some ridiculous strawman argument about prices. Then you double down on your stupidity by quoting the price for the most expensive configuration, instead of the standard model most people will buy. It's up to you to either admit your mistake or provide evidence supporting your claim.
But sure, since you're both ignorant and lazy, and I have actually done the homework, here are some similar PC configurations and how they compare in price with the maxed-out MacBook Pro 16":
(List of PC models taken from https://www.techradar.com/best... [techradar.com])
Lenovo ThinkPad P16 [lenovo.com]: $8124
- Core i9-12950HX vPro
- 128 GB DDR5-4800Mhz (4x32 GB non-ECC)
- 2 x 4 TB M.2 SSD
- 16" WQUXGA display, 600 nits
Note that this doesn't include a graphics card. Add $900 (nVIDIA RTX A3000) or $1550 (nVIDIA RTX A4500) if you want to be able to play games or do 3D work.
HP Zbook Fury 16 [hp.com]: $10905
- Core i9-13950HX vPro
- 16" WUXGA display, 1000 nits (1920x1200)
- 2 TB + 4 TB + 2 TB SSD
- 128 GB DDR5-4800Mhz (4x32 GB, ECC)
This one doesn't include a graphics card either.
Dell Precision 7770 Workstation [dell.com]: $12557
- Core i9-12950HX vPro
- 17" WLED UHD display, 500 nits (3840x2160)
- nVIDIA RTX A3000 12GB
- 128 GB DDR5-3600Mhz (1x128 GB)
- 2 x 4 TB SSD
According to this site, you can buy this one for a limited time for 50% off, or $6254... if it wasn't for the fact that you can't actually buy it because it's not available.
Getac X600 Fully Rugged Laptop [avadirect.com]: $15482
- Core i7-11850H vPro
- 15.6" LCD display
- 128 GB DDR4
- 3 x 1 TB SSD + 3 x 1 TB SSD (total 6 TB)
No discrete graphics card.
I can't wait to see what examples you can present of machines with similar specs to the fully-loaded MacBook Pro that are actually cheaper.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
The Apple models don't include a discrete GPU either. You get Apple's integrated GPU, which is weaker than AMD's for gaming.
The other thing to remember is that when you buy 128GB of RAM and 8TB of SSD from Lenovo, you are paying for convenience. It's much cheaper to get the minimum spec and upgrade it yourself. With Apple, you have no choice. It's all soldered in and locked down.
Plus that's list price for the Lenovo. Only corporate buyers pay list, everyone else waits for them to take 50% off in one of thei
Re: (Score:3)
The Apple models don't include a discrete GPU either. You get Apple's integrated GPU, which is weaker than AMD's for gaming.
If you are buying a M3 Macbook Pro (or any of the listed laptops) completed maxed out for gaming, you are doing something wrong.
The other thing to remember is that when you buy 128GB of RAM and 8TB of SSD from Lenovo, you are paying for convenience. It's much cheaper to get the minimum spec and upgrade it yourself. With Apple, you have no choice. It's all soldered in and locked down.
True it's cheaper but bear in mind that a 8TB NVME SSD is about $1000 to purchase by itself so it is not cheap.
Plus that's list price for the Lenovo. Only corporate buyers pay list, everyone else waits for them to take 50% off in one of their regular sales. Apple doesn't do sales.
The point of this pricing challenge is to compare list prices. Other laptops with similar specs are indeed more expensive than the new M3 MacbookPro. Second, in my experience Apple will reduce prices when new models come out.
Re: (Score:2)
For GPU comparisons it's important to note that the ones Lenovo offers on Thinkpads are professional grade. They come with certifications for correct output, and special driver features that AMD and Nvidia make you pay extra for. Comparing them to the GPUs in Mx processors isn't like-for-like, for either gaming or professional work.
I'm sure a lot of buyers don't care though, they just want light gaming and/or video stuff from their GPU. Drive a couple of 4k monitors, run some low end CAD stuff for 3D printi
Re: (Score:2)
Comparing them to the GPUs in Mx processors isn't like-for-like, for either gaming or professional work.
Then why did you compare it for gaming? Second how do you assert the M3 Max MacBookPro is not for professional work. Everything in the overall specifications suggests that laptop is not for average consumers.
I'm sure a lot of buyers don't care though, they just want light gaming and/or video stuff from their GPU. Drive a couple of 4k monitors, run some low end CAD stuff for 3D printing.
I highly doubt anyone will buy a $7000 machine for the light use cases you presented.
Re: (Score:2)
The Mac doesn't include a "graphics card". Can't even add one! Checkmate.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
You don't seem to understand logical fallacies, because you respond to a comment about screen sizes with some ridiculous strawman argument about prices. Then you double down on your stupidity by quoting the price for the most expensive configuration, instead of the standard model most people will buy. It's up to you to either admit your mistake or provide evidence supporting your claim.
These comparisons seem a bit bonkers to me because the bulk of the cost is in maxing out components you can purchase and install yourself for many thousands of dollars less.
New Macbooks can't have their RAM or internal storage upgraded after purchase. With Macbook you have no choice but to be ripped off severely by the configurator.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Yes 18 is the same as 128
and 1 is the same as 8
Sad that the Apple fanboi is the one with common sense.
Perfect!
Re: Widens range (price wise) (Score:2)
It doesnâ(TM)t exist, most configurations with DDR5 max out at 64GB as the modules are so expensive. But if you could find it, it will be closer to 10k.
Re: (Score:2)
You DO understand that $7200 is insane to pay for any laptop, right? Just checking on the the-fuck-is-WRONG-with-you fanboi status here...
Be thankful you're not in the UK, where Apple seem to think the exchange rate is 1USD = 1GBP.
Re: Widens range (price wise) (Score:2)
US prices are excluding tax, UK prices include 20% VAT. Given the exchange rate (you can thank the Tories and Brexit for that), that would explain your observation.
Last time I actually priced out buying a Mac from the US instead of the UK, it was only a little more expensive in the UK. It was hardly worth the effort. Maybe if youâ(TM)re after a high end Mac you could fly to Boston or New Jersey, head over to an Apple Store in one of the states without sales tax and end up ahead, assuming you break t
Re: (Score:2)
What has that got to do with what OP and I were discussing? Do you randomly jump into other conversations and tell them whatever they are buying are too expensive too? Are you really that socially inept and psychologically needy?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Wait until you find out how much that Ferrari costs that you need to get you to the job site! It's worth it to have such a capable tool!
Some people need to compensate for their own personal lack of capability.
"The great thing about laptops is you can configure them, and thus the costs, to meet your own needs and budgets and Apple has done a good job of having a good range."
Apple is the only PC maker that denies field upgradeability for their laptops. They are literally the worst in the industry at configu
Re: (Score:3)
Some people have plenty of disposable income.
Some people like to have toys and can readily afford them.
Some people are jealous.
Re: (Score:2)
Apple is the only PC maker that denies field upgradeability for their laptops. They are literally the worst in the industry at configurability.
Um what? Lenovo has laptops with soldered RAM. Dell has laptops with soldered RAM. HP has laptops with soldered RAM. By "only" you mean almost every one.
Re: (Score:2)
You should really take a look at the two models in a store, 14" may feel small but in person it's a pretty good size.
I may well do that, since I find myself somewhat flush atm. I still think back to using a friend's 13" MB and wondering how the fuck he managed with that. All that said, now that I've just discovered that I can shrink the UI (and made an ass of myself in the process) I may just wait until this 15" MBP has had a full decade of service. It's on its second battery and I have another spare, but for some reason if it goes to sleep overnight it thinks the battery is empty and I have to reset the SMC to get it to
Re: (Score:2)
Not a lot there in my opinion, was surprised they did an whole "event" around this release.
Apple does "events" because they get free advertising out of it. Reddit, Facebook, X, and here are all abuzz about how Apple announced their latest spec bumps.
I mean clearly it works, because they've even roped me into acknowledging it by bating me into leaving a few comments, and I'm only invested in the iThingy side of Apple's hardware. Even there I've kind of fallen off the upgrade treadmill since I've gotten sick of buying a new iPad every few years, they killed off the iPhone Mini, and I really only
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Apple does "events" because they get free advertising out of it
I totally agree on that point, there's just usually more to them and the timing on this one is odd...
I almost feel more like this was a "vanity event" where they did it just for the hell of it and for fun.
Perhaps the M3 passed Apple's checkout process earlier than expected; or TSMC determined that 3nm M3 yields were high enough that they could commit to Apple earlier than expected.
Re: (Score:2)
Not a lot there in my opinion, was surprised they did an whole "event" around this release.
Of note is that as one model got a little cheaper on the low end, on the high end you can now spend $7200 on a fully specced 16" MacBook Pro.
One interesting side note is the whole event was filmed on an iPhone 15 Pro Max (noted at the very end in closing text).
It was a short Event; IMHO, they actually kind of undersold some of the M3's improvements.
I think it was to quell the tech press rumors that Apple had no new Mac stuff until 2024. Plus they mopped-up the TouchBar, conjured-up a nice-budget MacBook Pro, and provided the iMac with a sorely-needed SoC-Upgrade. So, not "nothing", for sure!
And, bonus, leapfrogged (yet again) past the likes of Qualcomm's ARM PC efforts. . .
24" iMac (Score:4, Informative)
I know I am biased... but I'm curious who the market for the 24" iMac is today. I know I am not the middle of the market, but I wouldn't go back from my 33" (dual) screen setup to something that small... even with the compromise of multiple monitors. Apple seems to have really locked themselves into a 10-year old size.
Is there some kind of mass market for (overpriced) 24" AIO computers that I am missing?
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Question, how many times do you have to row the mouse to get it from one corner of the screen to the other? Or do you have the acceleration set so high that you can't get the cursor between two letters?
Having to choose one or the other is what made me stick to a single 24" screen.
Re: (Score:3)
Question, how many times do you have to row the mouse to get it from one corner of the screen to the other? Or do you have the acceleration set so high that you can't get the cursor between two letters?
Have you looked at mouse settings in the last decade? Currently I am on dual 27" 4K displays and no one has to "row" the mouse serval times to get from corner to another.
Re: (Score:2)
Last two decades.
In the early/mid 2000s, I got a 4 monitor setup by rescuing old Matrox PCI cards and sync on green workstation monitors. At least 3 of them were 1600x1200, so I had a vast number of horizontal pixels for the day, and not bad my modern standards :)
It was just fine using xset. Yep the acceleration was high, but the threshold was reasonable so it never felt imprecise or unnatural.
Re: (Score:2)
I am typing this message while using a 48" monitor. I have no earthly idea of the problem you speak of. On modern OS'es, the problems you are experiencing, do not exist. With about 2" of mouse movement, my pointer travels from left edge of the monitor the right edge. And when I slow down the movement a tiny bit, I can zero in on the text I need to select very quickly.
Many years ago when I got my first 24" LCD display, I thought I was in heaven. Now I consider them too small. Same story with RAM and di
Re: (Score:2)
Or do you have the acceleration set so high that you can't get the cursor between two letters?
Do you know the difference between speed and acceleration? The latter allows you to get from one side to the other on a 4K screen while also allowing you to get pixel perfect mouse movements unless you have a physical disability.
If you're rowing at all, you have your mouse setup incorrectly.
Re: (Score:2)
Can't answer that because doing that is never required. You're just replaying old Steve Jobs talking points from the 80's.
Answer: Multi-monitors + normal users. (Score:2, Interesting)
If it was a desktop PC, you can throw in as many powerful GPUs as you can afford. That said, I need the power for work and work won't let me use my own hardware...so I am stuck with what the default Apple offers is.
For my personal computing
Re: (Score:2)
The 24" iMac does have its good points.
For example, if I just want a simple desktop machine. I do IT work, don't really care to spend much screen time gaming, and just want something that is solid enough to do the usual Chrome browsing, but can also spin up virtual machines and run Vagrant if I need to, an iMac is good enough. Less desktop clutter, a nice screen, good for Zoom meetings. No, it isn't a gaming rig, but it is good enough and minimalistic enough. After years of IT, just having a simple scre
Re: (Score:2)
All in ones produce waste. The monitor is still useful when the rest of the computer isn't. Nobody should ever make them for this reason. There's nothing preventing Apple from having a standard and attractive mounting strategy for itty bitty computers on the back of displays which would offer exactly the same functionality without the waste, except the search for every last nickel. In fact there would actually be a benefit to Apple, because instead of having to convince users to repeat their mistake by buyi
Re: (Score:2)
The monitor is still useful when the rest of the computer isn't.
You do know that you can use any iMac since 2011 as an external monitor, right? Also you can use the iMac as external storage at the same time because Thunderbolt exists.
There's nothing preventing Apple from having a standard and attractive mounting strategy for itty bitty computers on the back of displays which would offer exactly the same functionality without the waste,
You do know Apple makes the Mac Mini right? I have seen them mounted this way.
Re: (Score:2)
You do know that you can use any iMac since 2011 as an external monitor, right?
Which doesn't work if the computer part of the iMac fails
You do know Apple makes the Mac Mini right? I have seen them mounted this way.
So then they don't need to keep selling iMacs, right?
Right?
Re: (Score:2)
I'm curious who the market for the 24" iMac is today.
I'm pretty sure that was the computer the local Tesla showroom used for playing the instructional video that they had my partner and I watch before letting us test drive the car. So, that's at least one iMac sold.
Re: (Score:2)
I know I am biased... but I'm curious who the market for the 24" iMac is today. I know I am not the middle of the market, but I wouldn't go back from my 33" (dual) screen setup to something that small... even with the compromise of multiple monitors. Apple seems to have really locked themselves into a 10-year old size.
Is there some kind of mass market for (overpriced) 24" AIO computers that I am missing?
Business offices of all shapes and types; Computer Labs; anyplace a medium-sized AIO makes sense. Which is actually a lot of places.
Re: 24" iMac (Score:2)
So you have dual 32 inch 4k monitors, and you're calling dual 24" 4k(+) a compromise? Come on man.
Do you know what the difference between 32@4k and 24@4.5k is?
I'm not saying 24" is good enough for anyone, but it's about six inches of chair to monitor difference. Let's talk about the six inches of physical desktop space you're saving with dual 32" monitors. Some people need it more in the desk to belly button area and that's fair, it's not a good epeen metric when you go up several size classes every time yo
Re: (Score:2)
Some of us are getting old now and need bigger fonts. So My dual 34" displays are 4k but they are scaled way up so I can read. A 24" display might as well by 20" once I scale it up.
Re: (Score:2)
Is there some kind of mass market for (overpriced) 24" AIO computers that I am missing?
Not everyone wants multiple monitors. An AIO has the appeal of being a single unit. The vast majority of uses I have seen are for non technical people like a receptionist/secretary. A central family computer is another use case where there is not enough desk space in the den area.
Re: (Score:2)
I have a 27" iMac; they got rid of them because they wanted to make it thinner and lighter. Maybe not for lugging around, but to reduce shipping costs.
It was a great computer when I bought it in 2018. Today not so much unfortunately.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
"Maybe not for lugging around, but to reduce shipping costs."
Right, which is why you can't buy a TV anymore, manufacturers want to reduce shipping costs.
Apple User Here (Score:2)
While the M* silicon it has been shown to carry some advantage, I am not keen in leaving the Intel world for what I am currently doing.
Sometimes I have to run x86 software (Linux and Windows) within a VM, with nothing in sight that makes me believe the developers of such software going to release and ARM version of it.
Doing this with an M* silicon have abysmal performance, and given that such software is mostly CPU bound, thi
Event was mainly pitched to intel Mac users (Score:3)
Otherwise, yes, decent progress, impressive power yet with much longer than average battery life. However I donâ(TM)t think that many M Mac users will feel the need to upgrade to this v3 - hence the strong marketing towards intel mac users.
Re: (Score:2)
It's better to brag about how much better you are than the competition, not how much better you are than a year ago.
Not that long ago, Apple would brag about how much faster each release of OS X was. That might at times have been true, but only because OS X was such a pig.
Longeivity (Score:2)
Apple stuff lasts a *long* time. I still have an iPhone 5S laying around somewhere that runs fine. I ran a PowerMac 6100 as my main desktop for five years. I still have it, last year I dropped a new PRAM battery in and it fired right back up after sitting idle for the better part of 20 years.
Re: (Score:2)
I bought a m1max last year at a large discount when the m2's came out. I love this laptop. My wife got my old intel MacBook Pro which was top of the line when it came out 2 years previously. There is zero reason to upgrade her to a m series MacBook. I think apple wants us to think there is a reason, but there is not. Maybe in a year or two when more devs stop supporting intel Macs or apple kills updates, but for now it would be a waste of money. Hopefully the M4 will come out and I'll be ready to upgrade an
I love the touch bar (Score:2)
Mac doesn't have keyboard with dedicated sound button like any other normal computer have, the touch bar give that and also the autocorrect.
That was one of my favorite feature of my mac.
It's a sad day for Apple today
GPU Dynamic Caching? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
On top of that, there are advances in lithography
Re: (Score:2)
Much appreciated, thanks. Looks like I have some reading to do.
Re: (Score:2)
It's the curse of the SoC. You want plentiful RAM and can accept it if it's "slow" RAM. However as I understand it you can cope because Intel and AMD have loaded each core up with loads of cache and done the hard work of figuring out how to optimise this so it's not so apparent that any trip to system RAM is painful. ARM isn't up to snuff, AND they have the lower code density issue that comes from a more RISC-y ISA AND they have that iGPU that they are trying to pitch as a replacement for a discrete GPU unl