This really is the problem with the SOC approach. It is difficult, basically impossible, to create one design to serve both needs optimally ... at a decent price. Maybe if packaging tech ever gets to the point that Apple could offer more processor variants than just bins this will be possible (or rather possible for both needs to get what they want at the same overall price point).
Gotta remind you here that chip design is a slow process. M4 series core counts likely would've been set in stone before Apple got enough customer preference data to make a decision that way.
Ah well, didn't happen. Maybe they'll do it with a firmware update if they release a 7k or 8k 120 Hz monitor in 2025.
If going CTO, you can get both variants of the Max on the 14” for 800/1300$ respectively, vs the 24GB Pro. That includes the required RAM upgrades. The difference is that the 24GB 14” comes with 1TB SSD already, while the 16” version is 512 and going to the Max makes you take the 1TB upgrade too.
Maybe, but I still view it in the same vein as comparing the HX 370 or Snapdragon Elite to the base M2/M3. To me it's dishonest. Yes I know we're talking about marketing. I still don't have to like it.
what laptop would you like Apple to compare to? What’s comparable to an MBP nowadays?Maybe, but I still view it in the same vein as comparing the HX 370 or Snapdragon Elite to the base M2/M3. To me it's dishonest. Yes I know we're talking about marketing. I still don't have to like it.
they may find use for Ultras in their own data centers for use with that offboarded AI stuff?
did he? I don’t pay much attention to him since he started to bore me.
Yeah as I said, unfortunately the Arrow Lake laptops aren’t out yet, so Intel is out unless it’s last generation. Similarly, AMD’s Strix Halo would be good … if it were out. But there are still better chips to use as a foil than Lunar Lake (which is fine to beat up on for the base M4).
It makes sense to me for Apple to compare to stuff that is currently available, and which is the bulk of the market they are competing against. I’m pretty sure that leaves out AMD and QC still, but I don’t know what the mix of sales is right now for high end laptops.
But Lunar Lake isn’t high end - not compared to the Max anyway and even the Pro is dubious. Most laptops carrying Lunar Lake SoCs are between $900-$2100 (I did see one more than that no idea why). It’s basically a base M-series SOC with a slightly bigger 4.2 TFLOP GPU (depending on the model) - fewer cores, run faster than the M4 (roughly 4TFLOPs I think, maybe a little less). 8-core CPU beaten in performance and or efficiency by the M4 (and base M3).
yeah, it’s just a little hard to compare MBP to much of anything, because the competitors either don’t sell well enough to matter (or so I understand), or don’t come close in (pick one) power consumption, fan noise, thermals, performance, etc. Windows-land has been chasing MBP for a long time. They’ll come closest with QC, but if they don’t sell well because of actual or perceived software incompatibilities, then no point in comparing to those, at least not yet. Apple sells computers, not cpus, so when they do their CPU comparisons they typically tended to look at the computers they perceive to be competing against them in a particular category, and not really looking for “apples-to-not-apples” comparisons at the CPU level.
