This is such a weird announcement. They’re releasing an M3 Ultra (which is supposed to be the top of the line chip) on the same day they announced the M4 Max. It’s just bizarre and makes no sense...
This is such a weird announcement. They’re releasing an M3 Ultra (which is supposed to be the top of the line chip) on the same day they announced the M4 Max.
It’s just bizarre and makes no sense to someone viewing these computers without knowledge of Apple’s naming scheme. Imagine being on the purchase page and trying to decide which one to choose…Max seems like the best, since you know it’s the right in the name. Can’t get more than maximum can you? But it’s not. The Ultra is better. Even though it’s got a lower number in the name.
The only thing that makes sense is that they’ll announce a new Mac Pro with the M4 Ultra as an exclusive chip for their highest margin product.
On a technological level, it's not strange to see this kind of thing happen. It's common that the beefiest, most parallel CPUs come out the latest in the cycle. Making chips this big is hard, and...
On a technological level, it's not strange to see this kind of thing happen. It's common that the beefiest, most parallel CPUs come out the latest in the cycle. Making chips this big is hard, and it often takes to the end of a node's lifecycle for companies to productionize it. Intel and AMD often release their prosumer/server level CPUs late.
In terms of product, it is a bit confusing, since the consumer needs to be able to make a tradeoff: do they want the M4 Max, with better single core performance, or the M3 Ultra, with better multi-core performance and much higher memory?
But, if you're shelling out $10k for a computer, I feel like you should probably know what you're doing. So I think it's fine.
I agree that these chips are absolutely insane when it comes to performance. But the naming is needlessly obtuse and unclear. I’ve seen many a corporate order placed for wildly inappropriate...
I agree that these chips are absolutely insane when it comes to performance. But the naming is needlessly obtuse and unclear.
But, if you're shelling out $10k for a computer, I feel like you should probably know what you're doing. So I think it's fine.
I’ve seen many a corporate order placed for wildly inappropriate configurations. The people doing the ordering usually have no idea what’s needed for specific workloads. And add on the fact that it’s a Mac and doesn’t use any parts they know about. I could easily see it confusing even a seasoned IT person.
How so? The only unintuitive part is the ordinals "pro, max, ultra", and in this context you only need to now "max, ultra". Is it not clear that ultra > max? Sure, but it's not THAT complicated....
But the naming is needlessly obtuse and unclear.
How so? The only unintuitive part is the ordinals "pro, max, ultra", and in this context you only need to now "max, ultra". Is it not clear that ultra > max? Sure, but it's not THAT complicated. People can keep track of a whopping 2 enums. It feels like a huge exaggeration.
I’ve seen many a corporate order placed for wildly inappropriate configurations. The people doing the ordering usually have no idea what’s needed for specific workloads.
In that context, they're buying macbooks, not M3 Ultras. This is the category of computing where you'd buy quadros. When you're spending a used car's worth of money on a computer, no IT person is going to be buying it for their marketing intern.
This is such a weird announcement. They’re releasing an M3 Ultra (which is supposed to be the top of the line chip) on the same day they announced the M4 Max.
It’s just bizarre and makes no sense to someone viewing these computers without knowledge of Apple’s naming scheme. Imagine being on the purchase page and trying to decide which one to choose…Max seems like the best, since you know it’s the right in the name. Can’t get more than maximum can you? But it’s not. The Ultra is better. Even though it’s got a lower number in the name.
The only thing that makes sense is that they’ll announce a new Mac Pro with the M4 Ultra as an exclusive chip for their highest margin product.
On a technological level, it's not strange to see this kind of thing happen. It's common that the beefiest, most parallel CPUs come out the latest in the cycle. Making chips this big is hard, and it often takes to the end of a node's lifecycle for companies to productionize it. Intel and AMD often release their prosumer/server level CPUs late.
In terms of product, it is a bit confusing, since the consumer needs to be able to make a tradeoff: do they want the M4 Max, with better single core performance, or the M3 Ultra, with better multi-core performance and much higher memory?
But, if you're shelling out $10k for a computer, I feel like you should probably know what you're doing. So I think it's fine.
I agree that these chips are absolutely insane when it comes to performance. But the naming is needlessly obtuse and unclear.
I’ve seen many a corporate order placed for wildly inappropriate configurations. The people doing the ordering usually have no idea what’s needed for specific workloads. And add on the fact that it’s a Mac and doesn’t use any parts they know about. I could easily see it confusing even a seasoned IT person.
How so? The only unintuitive part is the ordinals "pro, max, ultra", and in this context you only need to now "max, ultra". Is it not clear that ultra > max? Sure, but it's not THAT complicated. People can keep track of a whopping 2 enums. It feels like a huge exaggeration.
In that context, they're buying macbooks, not M3 Ultras. This is the category of computing where you'd buy quadros. When you're spending a used car's worth of money on a computer, no IT person is going to be buying it for their marketing intern.
I’m happy to see they’ve moved away from the gigantic box model. This thing looks like a small stack of Mac Minis.