Apple's new MacBook Pro with M2 Max packs up to 96GB of RAM (also: Mac mini M2)

[saltycaramel]

1 hour ago, saltycaramel said:

In other words Apple products offer Apple users a great (real/perceived) value overall (especially those products with no easily comparable competition, like the M1 and M2 Macs, what’s the fair price for market-leading efficiency and battery life?)

 

bump

 

Anybody wanna have a go at answering this with a quote $$$? 

 

 

I can play the cherry picking game as well: I find it shameful, borderline a scam, that in 2023 there are still many x86 laptops on sale that are worse in many regards than 2020 M1 Macs, no matter what cheap RAM options they offer. 

[ewitte]

23 hours ago, nOm nom NOM3 said:

I never thought I would see laptops shipping with more than 32gb of memory ever. 

I wonder why they decided to do 96 and who they expect to need that (and buy a mac to do their thing)

 

There really Isn't a point people that need it tend to buy it from cheaper sources.  I'm currently running 48GB in my work laptop, but it came with 16GB.  I guess not with Apple though they design to prevent upgrades...

[Commodus]

15 hours ago, TetraSky said:

Was wondering where this came from, considering the thread is about the macbook and that starts at $1300.
Looking it up further, it's just the Mac mini.

  Reveal hidden contents

 

The fact they charge an extra $200 to double the SSD capacity is outright robbery, though. A 500GB SSD is about $40.
Plus, the damn thing is soldered in, so you can't even upgrade the storage yourself. Unless you go with external ones.

Sorry for the confusion! I wouldn't use aftermarket SSD prices as comparisons (odds are that $40 SSD is much slower), but I will agree that Apple is baking in a hefty profit margin. Thankfully the Mac mini supports Thunderbolt 4/USB 4, so any reasonably quick external SSD should be enough if you're looking to expand.

[Commodus]

5 hours ago, Sauron said:

it's just a little funny they'd brag about this after years of being dead last on memory limits  

For sure — Apple is being opportunistic here. Still, I doubt customers for that kind of memory will complain too much when it gives them a genuinely good reason to buy a MacBook Pro over a Windows laptop.

[D13H4RD]

51 minutes ago, Commodus said:

Sorry for the confusion! I wouldn't use aftermarket SSD prices as comparisons (odds are that $40 SSD is much slower), but I will agree that Apple is baking in a hefty profit margin. Thankfully the Mac mini supports Thunderbolt 4/USB 4, so any reasonably quick external SSD should be enough if you're looking to expand.

That's the strategy I'm going with my MBP. I have the base storage config and currently work off a 2TB Samsung T7 Shield SSD.

 

The cost to upgrade the internal drive is absolutely ridiculous, and the fact that it is soldered continues to be a pet peeve. I'm willing to put up with that for the battery life and on-battery performance at the moment because there hasn't yet been a direct alternative with the same benefits, but it is frankly beyond silly at this point to have the whole SSD be soldered, when M.2 drives can offer pretty much the same speed and whatnot.

 

The machine has been great so far, but it doesn't mean it's perfect.

[maartendc]

22 hours ago, D13H4RD said:

Feeling pretty eh on this one.

 

Been using my M1 Max 16" since November, and I still haven't got anything significant to complain about it. 96GB of RAM is nice to have but as someone who predominantly uses their MacBook Pro for photography, that's very overkill (though I understand that there are workloads that absolutely benefit from the RAM).

 

Everything else is pretty eh. This is absolutely a release designed to get holdouts still on Intel MacBook Pros to upgrade. 

I thought the same thing, untill I realised that it is "unified" memory. Meaning it also serves as VRAM. That is pretty darn cool, and 96 GB of VRAM would enable certain scenario's that would be very difficult to do on even a very powerful dedicated laptop GPU. Nvidia mobile GPU's seem to max out at 16GB.

 

Not sure how the M2's GPU compares in terms of speed otherwise to like an Nvidia professional grade laptop GPU though?

[saltycaramel]

Debates about soldered SSDs, what year is this.

[D13H4RD]

8 minutes ago, maartendc said:

I thought the same thing, untill I realised that it is "unified" memory. Meaning it also serves as VRAM. That is pretty darn cool, and 96 GB of VRAM would enable certain scenario's that would be very difficult to do on even a very powerful dedicated laptop GPU. Nvidia mobile GPU's seem to max out at 16GB.

 

Not sure how the M2's GPU compares in terms of speed otherwise to like an Nvidia professional grade laptop GPU though?

Well yeah, but this is true of M1 as well. The M2 is essentially having the core M1 architecture but having its A14-based components upgraded to A15-based ones, alongside some other updates. It's a specbump.

 

Like I said in my original post, this is a release that is 100% designed to target those who are still using Intel-based MacBook Pros. If you already own the 2021 M1-based 14"/16" model, there is little in this refresh that warrants an upgrade, unless for whatever reason, you really need WiFI 6E, HDMI 2.1 or the 96GB RAM config.

 

96GB of RAM in a machine that can be directly accessed by both the CPU and GPU is cool, but it is also absolutely a hyper-niche usecase. I just use mine as a photo-editing workstation, and 32GB has been working fine.

[saltycaramel]

I wonder if Apple is also paving the way for some VR-related workflows that will require tons of VRAM..

[maartendc]

3 hours ago, Obioban said:

On Macs, RAM and VRAM are one and the same. So, if you're working on a HUGE 3D file, the ability to load all of it into VRAM/RAM is game changing.

 

Edit: should have read the entire thread before posting-- this was already covered.

I mean, I professionally do CAD / 3D modelling and rendering work for architecture, with file sizes that are over 700 GB. But the actual memory usage of those applications is never more than 20GB. I would be curious to know which types of applications actually use that much RAM / VRAM regularly.

 

Apple claims they tested this using "OctaneRender 2022.1". Which seems to be a rendering engine akin to Vray. I guess if you are producing SUUUUPER complex animations or renders for an actual big budget movie or something?

 

But I feel like at that point, you are getting to a use case where it is unlikely that people do this on a laptop? They use dedicated renderfarms, or at the very least a super tricked out workstation, for that kind of stuff.

 

Is there anyone on here who has actually done this type of work on a laptop and could use this amount of RAM/VRAM? Genuinely curious.

[Spindel]

DAMIT APPLE!

 

I have a M1 mini that I ordered at launch and I’m very happy with it. 
 

Only thing I have wished for is a little bit more beef on the GPU side and that was only for the few games I play and not at all needed for work (that involves AutoCAD that runs great on the M1).

 

The M2 Pro Mini is what I asked for and I’m really tempted. But at the same time it’s stupid since my current M1 is plenty fast for all work I do and the games I do play on it run well enough…

 

I’ll probably should tell the wife about wanting to order one since I know she’ll say no…

[Dracarris]

On 1/17/2023 at 6:41 PM, Supreme Calamitas said:

512gb + 16gb ram for $2000, same config in Germany for €2400

 

Enough said

$2000 is without sales tax. $2000 + 19% German sales tax is ~$2400, which is 2220€. Still a gap, but not nearly as wide.

[Zodiark1593]

1 hour ago, D13H4RD said:

That's the strategy I'm going with my MBP. I have the base storage config and currently work off a 2TB Samsung T7 Shield SSD.

 

The cost to upgrade the internal drive is absolutely ridiculous, and the fact that it is soldered continues to be a pet peeve. I'm willing to put up with that for the battery life and on-battery performance at the moment because there hasn't yet been a direct alternative with the same benefits, but it is frankly beyond silly at this point to have the whole SSD be soldered, when M.2 drives can offer pretty much the same speed and whatnot.

 

The machine has been great so far, but it doesn't mean it's perfect.

From an objective standpoint, a Macbook is the “best” laptop, but the tradeoffs (beyond of course, the price) are quite steep. If you’re a gamer at all, losing x86 is a borderline non-starter, and Macbooks are quite a bad offender in proprietary, difficult-to-replace components and expandability. 
 

The gaming bit is a big shame, because the GPU in M1 and M2 series are actually quite good, and could otherwise make mincemeat of the vast majority of what Steam offers. However, without Bootcamp, options are quite limited, and you lose out on a lot of flexibility with PC gaming. 

[Dracarris]

21 minutes ago, Zodiark1593 said:

The gaming bit is a big shame, because the GPU in M1 and M2 series are actually quite good, and could otherwise make mincemeat of the vast majority of what Steam offers. However, without Bootcamp, options are quite limited, and you lose out on a lot of flexibility with PC gaming. 

A ton happened in recent years in regards to gaming on a Mac. But yes, you probably won't be able to play your favorite recent CoD on a Mac anytime soon.

 

Bootcamp wouldn't help at all on current ARM-based Macs.

 

If you actually think it's a good idea to game on a device that is heavily volume and therefore heat dissipation capacity limited (aka, a laptop), then I'm afraid you'll have to go for one of the many Windows gaming-laptop with IMHO very questionable, targeted design.

 

TLDR: Macs are not meant for gaming, but either for light workloads as office companions that run all-day, or to get shit done.

[WhitetailAni]

On 1/17/2023 at 11:30 AM, AluminiumTech said:

I'm very disappointed that Apple continues to sell 8GB RAM computers in 2023.

I have my MacBook Pro 2012 15" Unibody OCLP'd to Ventura. It has only 8GB RAM. I routinely have Chrome and Discord open and RAM usage is about 40%.

I am considering an upgrade to 16GB because Xcode bumps usage up to 86%, but that's it. 8GB is plenty.

[D13H4RD]

49 minutes ago, Zodiark1593 said:

From an objective standpoint, a Macbook is the “best” laptop, but the tradeoffs (beyond of course, the price) are quite steep. If you’re a gamer at all, losing x86 is a borderline non-starter, and Macbooks are quite a bad offender in proprietary, difficult-to-replace components and expandability. 
 

The gaming bit is a big shame, because the GPU in M1 and M2 series are actually quite good, and could otherwise make mincemeat of the vast majority of what Steam offers. However, without Bootcamp, options are quite limited, and you lose out on a lot of flexibility with PC gaming. 

Pretty much why I continue to have my desktop, amongst other reasons. I don't game anymore, or at least as much as I used to, hence why I don't have a gaming laptop anymore, and never considered one lately, but for the times where I'm at home and just want to kick back for a bit, that's where my desktop comes in.

 

I genuinely don't think Mac gaming is going to go much farther than running iPad games alongside a handful of actual quality AAA-level games, which is truly unfortunate. I'm willing to be proved wrong, but Macs have never been a good platform for gaming.

[Sauron]

3 hours ago, Commodus said:

For sure — Apple is being opportunistic here. Still, I doubt customers for that kind of memory will complain too much when it gives them a genuinely good reason to buy a MacBook Pro over a Windows laptop.

Yeah, I guess it fills a niche. Not that laptops with more ram don't exist but few are in this form factor, at least for now. Of course, at such a steep price I wonder if you wouldn't be better off offloading more ram intensive workloads on a render mule or a vps...

 

I vaguely recall Linus being unable to max out a rendering workstation with 96GB of ram years ago, while I'm sure some programs have gotten heavier I wonder how actually useful for interactive workloads it is.

50 minutes ago, Zodiark1593 said:

From an objective standpoint, a Macbook is the “best” laptop, but the tradeoffs (beyond of course, the price) are quite steep. If you’re a gamer at all, losing x86 is a borderline non-starter, and Macbooks are quite a bad offender in proprietary, difficult-to-replace components and expandability. 
 

The gaming bit is a big shame, because the GPU in M1 and M2 series are actually quite good, and could otherwise make mincemeat of the vast majority of what Steam offers. However, without Bootcamp, options are quite limited, and you lose out on a lot of flexibility with PC gaming. 

forget games, I literally could not do my job on a macbook because I need vmware. plus I'd be necessarily lugging around half a dozen adapters because there's no ethernet port, no commonly usable video port and no usb-a port, all stuff I need almost every day. I could use some old ass thiccpad with Linux if I had to, not a brand new macbook though.

 

macbooks are usable if your job can be carried out without ever connecting to anything and only requires native programs; that includes a lot of pure programming jobs (though not mine because industrial automation is weird) and many creative jobs, but the moment you need to interface with anything else that wasn't specifically made for macbooks the issues start. plus if you ever, ever need any kind of upgrade your only option is buying a whole new machine - my workplace originally gave me a 16gb machine but pretty soon I needed 32 and all I needed to do was request a dimm module which took 5 minutes to install, imagine if it had been a macbook...

[saltycaramel]

2 minutes ago, D13H4RD said:

Pretty much why I have continue to have my desktop, amongst other reasons. I don't game anymore, or at least as much as I used to, but for the times where I'm at home and just want to kick back for a bit, that's where my desktop comes in.

 

I genuinely don't think Mac gaming is going to go much farther than running iPad games alongside a handful of actual quality AAA-level games, which is truly unfortunate. I'm willing to be proved wrong, but Macs have never been a good platform for gaming.
 

 

In the latest Christmas sales from Steam/GoG/Epic I bought a lot of stuff for my M1 Pro 16” MBP by filtering the discounted games by “for macOS”. For sure it’s old stuff mostly, but a lot of stuff nonetheless. (Had to register to the Epic store just for Borderlands 3 because apparently the version distributed via Steam is Windows-only)

 

The Metro games.

A couple of old COD games with infinite zombie gameplay.

Classic Blizzard games with Mac support (my favorite is SC2, works wonderfully on my M1 Pro, it’s my go-to for a weekly “kicking back” session)

 

An then the recent probably-paid-by-Apple showcase-games (RE Village, GRID Legends, No Man’s Sky, soon Baldur’s Gate 3), meant to be first class macOS citizens showcasing all the latest Metal optimizations.

 

And Apple Arcade games if you’re into something more casual (but also Fantasian as Linus can attest).

 

Game Console emulators.

Retrogames from GoG. 

 

For “kicking back a bit”, if one isn’t super picky about getting all the latest AAA games, there sure is some fun to be had and some gaming to be done…can’t wait for my next SC2 session..also SC1 remastered works on Macs. Not Diablo 2 remastered unfortunately. 

[BondiBlue]

29 minutes ago, Sauron said:

no commonly usable video port

I didn't realize full size HDMI wasn't a commonly used video port. The 14" and 16" MacBook Pros both have full size HDMI ports now, and the M2 models support 8K output. 

[Commodus]

31 minutes ago, Sauron said:

Yeah, I guess it fills a niche. Not that laptops with more ram don't exist but few are in this form factor, at least for now. Of course, at such a steep price I wonder if you wouldn't be better off offloading more ram intensive workloads on a render mule or a vps...

 

I vaguely recall Linus being unable to max out a rendering workstation with 96GB of ram years ago, while I'm sure some programs have gotten heavier I wonder how actually useful for interactive workloads it is.

In some cases a separate rendering system might be better, but I suspect Apple is mainly thinking of video editors who may need to handle an 8K project on-set, or a photographer dealing with hundreds of large RAW files immediately after (or even during) a shoot. The sort that needs gobs of memory wherever they happen to be.

[suicidalfranco]

25 minutes ago, Sauron said:

though not mine because industrial automation is weird

AHAHAHAHAHAHAH

 

 

 

 

 

Spoiler

true

 

 

 

 

 

Spoiler

 

 

 

 

 

 

and have yet to showcase the HMI ones...

 

 

 

And let's not forget the peripheral side:

USB to 422

USB to 485

USB to 232

CAN analyzers

 

Not one of those things could be used or run on a mac, ask me how i know

[Sauron]

1 hour ago, suicidalfranco said:

AHAHAHAHAHAHAH

 

 

 

 

 

  Hide contents

true

 

 

 

 

 

  Hide contents

 

 

 

 

 

 

and have yet to showcase the HMI ones...

 

 

 

And let's not forget the peripheral side:

USB to 422

USB to 485

USB to 232

CAN analyzers

 

Not one of those things could be used or run on a mac, ask me how i know

NOOOO not fucking STEP5

 

also yeah don't get me started on canopen, been smashing my head against that shit for the past 2 years

[HenrySalayne]

On 1/17/2023 at 7:54 PM, igormp said:

Except it is? Most commonly sold configs are 8gb ones, be it apple or not.

 

It may not be enough for you, but don't assume everyone's use case is like yours.

It's a little OT, but 8 GB for a computer sold in 2023 (or 2022) is barely keeping up with what we consider light tasks today. It's an insignificant cost to equip everything above $500 with 12 GB or 16 GB. And this is not an exclusive Apple problem (but you could argue Apple made it popular).

From a manufacturers perspective the 8 GB base model is the perfect entry piece for a product stack:

- people are more likely to shell out the insane memory upgrade prices

- the 8 GB models will be replaced / upgraded sooner

- they save a few bucks (might not be the case in the near future with higher capacity RAM chips)

That's why they do it - not because it's plenty for today's tasks.

 

 

 

[DrMacintosh]

On 1/17/2023 at 11:31 AM, Oliver Lopez Otero said:

Or that does that "Up to" mean I could use just 2 Thunderbolt-to-DP cables into my KVM Switch?

Absolutely nothing is preventing you from connecting two USB-C to DP cables to the back of the Mac mini and getting a display out. Up to means a maximum. You can have 3 displays total, two over TB and one over HDMI. 

[captain_to_fire]

On 1/18/2023 at 12:13 AM, Lightwreather JfromN said:

Mac Mini: 

Quote

The M2 Pro Mac mini is actually a bad value when specced up compared to a base M1 Max Mac Studio. With the latter you get better cooling and more I/O