Macs With M3 Chip Still Officially Support Only a Single External Display

[teh_hunterer]

Of all the differences between tech nerds and regular people, I think this has to be the most glaring and ridiculous—the overwhelming majority of people do not care about external displays. Casual users? Don't use external displays. Students? Don't use external displays.

Were you around arguing this years ago when even the Intel MacBook Air was able to drive multiple external displays? I hope you were, because at least then you would be consistent.

Hell, I'm a 30-year-old attorney

Yeah we can tell from your strong 30 year old attorney vibes, don't worry mate.

So get over it! If you need support for more than one external display, get a Pro chip!

Hope you catch a few fish with this one.

 

[FindingAvalon]

Wildly OT……

Does the base 14“ M3 replace the base 14“ M2Pro or the base 13“ M2 touch ar…

The base new 14 is the successor to the old base M2.

 

[Abazigal]

I wonder if Steve Jobs would have been satisfied with this limitation.

He would probably have found a way of convincing users that they didn’t really need more than one monitor, and everyone here would be lapping it up, hook, line and sinker.

 

[chucker23n1]

I wonder if Steve Jobs would have been satisfied with this limitation.

“I want to connect my Mac to three displays instead of two” is not the kind of scenario Steve lost sleep over.

(Personally, I think Apple is making a mistake here. Too many workplace setups now are two displays on a desk, with laptop off to the side, so you can occasionally grab it and bring it to a meeting room. The Air and $1599 14 would do great for this, but they don’t support it, so people either opt for an awkward DisplayLink solution or get a different brand. They’re unlikely to shell out hundreds more for this one feature.)

 

[UnbreakableAlex]

To the folks crying "artificial limitation" for the base M3 chip only supporting one monitor, like the base M2 before it, like the base M1 before it, you are wrong. It is a hardware limitation. The base "M" chips have 2 display buffers built into the chip. For laptops, 1 buffer for the internal display, and 1 buffer for 1 external display. The Mac mini can drive 2 external displays because it doesn't have a built in monitor.

Why would Apple do this? Because the vast majority of folks buying base "M" equipped Mac laptops do not use any external display at all, and most of those who do, only use 1 external display (I know, shocker!). So apple designed the base "M" chip accordingly for the entry level, novice, everyday user. Adding a feature to a chip that most people will never use didn't make sense, and they also get the benefits of offering that chip at a cheaper price (whatever that means).

If you need multi-monitor support, congratulations, you are a power user. That feature is available in the Pro, Max and Ultra "M" chip variants... and it's gonna cost ya.

But somehow apple forgot to add a entry level, novice, everyday user price tag in conclusion.

 

[danwells]

The limitation is probably not something Apple did on purpose, but it DOES have to do with where the M-series chips came from. They are very close relatives of iPhone processors (the early models more so than today's), and the iPhone, of course, supports only its one built-in display.

The M1 was very, very close to a double A14 Bionic, so they ended up with two frame buffers. One went to the internal display, and the other one supports the one external display. This doesn't explain why it won't do two externals, but NOT the internal display - that should have been easy.

There are only two USB-C/Thunderbolt ports (and no MagSafe), and they may not have considered the case where one of the monitors provides power - powered USB-C monitors were nowhere near as common when they were designing these machines in 2019 as they are today.

 

[twistedpixel8]

Sales of everything besides iPhones are down

Anyone with even a vague understanding of what’s happening with the global economy understands that’s nothing to do with Apple’s pricing.

 

[UKgaryb]

So.... ugh I've been sent one of these laptops Macbook "PRO" M3 base model and arguing with my employer as to why a PRO laptop cannot connect to more than one display.... absolutely horrific they call it a Macbook "PRO" yet only support one monitor.... Glad I got off the apple train a couple of years ago.

 

[chucker23n1]

So.... ugh I've been sent one of these laptops Macbook "PRO" M3 base model and arguing with my employer as to why a PRO laptop cannot connect to more than one display.... absolutely horrific they call it a Macbook "PRO" yet only support one monitor.... Glad I got off the apple train a couple of years ago.

Get a DisplayLink adapter. It's not great, but it's good enough for office use.

 

[Tagbert]

My employer dropped all of the dual screen setups and replaced them with 34” widescreen monitors. The new ones work much better and do well with base model M# Macs. They also provide power over USB so it’s a single cable setup.

 

[chucker23n1]

My employer dropped all of the dual screen setups and replaced them with 34” widescreen monitors. The new ones work much better and do well with base model M# Macs. They also provide power over USB so it’s a single cable setup.

Hmmm, I guess. I'm currently on 1512x982 built-in + 2560x1440 external + another 2560x1440 external. A 34-inch widescreen seems to be 3440x1440, so that's a fair amount less.

 

[victorvictoria]

So.... ugh I've been sent one of these laptops Macbook "PRO" M3 base model and arguing with my employer as to why a PRO laptop cannot connect to more than one display.... absolutely horrific they call it a Macbook "PRO" yet only support one monitor.... Glad I got off the apple train a couple of years ago.

Then get off the MacRumors train! What are you accomplishing here, anyway?

 

[ric22]

Macs equipped with the standard M3 chip still support only one external display with up to 6K resolution at 60Hz, according to Apple's tech specs. So far, the chip is available in the entry-level 14-inch MacBook Pro and the 24-inch iMac.

This limitation has existed since the first Apple silicon Macs with the M1 chip were released in 2020, but users can connect multiple external displays to M1, M2, and M3 Macs with DisplayLink adapters as an unofficial workaround. One exception is the Mac mini, which will likely be updated with the M3 chip next year and should retain support for up to two external displays, given that it lacks a built-in display.

The higher-end 14-inch and 16-inch MacBook Pro models support up to two external displays with the M3 Pro chip, and up to four with the M3 Max chip.

M3 chip display support:M3 Pro chip display support:

M3 Max chip display support:The new MacBook Pro models are now available to order, and most configurations will begin arriving to customers and launch in stores on Tuesday, November 7. M3 Max configurations will be available a few days later.

Article Link: Macs With M3 Chip Still Officially Support Only a Single External Display

Not surprised. It's a super fast tablet chip essentially. The Pro variant is the base one with design alterations intended for more serious computing.

 

[chucker23n1]

Not surprised. It's a super fast tablet chip essentially. The Pro variant is the base one with design alterations intended for more serious computing.

The problem I have with that is

a. office setups where you have two external displays are becoming quite common (and I don't mean just for developers)
b. the minimum you'd need to pay for such a setup is, leaving aside the Mac mini, would be $1,999 for a Mac Studio or 14-inch MacBook Pro with M3 Pro.

(Ignoring DisplayLink.)

 

[MacMikePro]

The problem I have with that is

a. office setups where you have two external displays are becoming quite common (and I don't mean just for developers)
b. the minimum you'd need to pay for such a setup is, leaving aside the Mac mini, would be $1,999 for a Mac Studio or 14-inch MacBook Pro with M3 Pro.

(Ignoring DisplayLink.)

Wait why are you “leaving aside the Mac mini”? Why even mention the Mac Studio if you’re not going to count the Mac mini? You started off saying “the minimum” and then jumped to the Mac Studio, which makes you completely lose all credibility in your argument. It’d be one thing if your argument was for laptop only scenarios but it’s not, there’s literally a Mac mini starting at $599 that you’re just ignoring to try to sound correct

 

[chucker23n1]

Wait why are you “leaving aside the Mac mini”?

Because I felt like it.

Desktops in such scenarios are getting rare.

It’d be one thing if your argument was for laptop only scenarios but it’s not, there’s literally a Mac mini starting at $599 that you’re just ignoring to try to sound correct

No, a mini for the relevant scenario starts at $1,299.

 

[ric22]

The problem I have with that is

a. office setups where you have two external displays are becoming quite common (and I don't mean just for developers)
b. the minimum you'd need to pay for such a setup is, leaving aside the Mac mini, would be $1,999 for a Mac Studio or 14-inch MacBook Pro with M3 Pro.

(Ignoring DisplayLink.)

Yeah, it's expensive! It wasn't in the days of Intel chips

 

[MacMikePro]

Because I felt like it.

Desktops in such scenarios are getting rare.


No, a mini for the relevant scenario starts at $1,299.

No, you are absolutely wrong, the relevant scenario is 2 monitors, and the cheapest Mac mini, which starts at $599 supports 2 monitors. So your original statement of “the minimum you’d need” is wrong. And you were the one that brought the Mac Studio into the scenario, so rare or not, you’re bringing desktops into it, and the Mac mini is a desktop just like the Mac Studio.

 

[chucker23n1]

No, you are absolutely wrong, the relevant scenario is 2 monitors, and the cheapest Mac mini, which starts at $599 supports 2 monitors.

I suppose that's true.

So your original statement of “the minimum you’d need” is wrong. And you were the one that brought the Mac Studio into the scenario, so rare or not, you’re bringing desktops into it, and the Mac mini is a desktop just like the Mac Studio.

I'm glad you got that out of your system.

 

[czoli]

The M3 chip hasn't got a Pro in it's name.
The MacBook Pro is the hardware and it refers to Pro Grade materials.....does that finally explain it to you?

and 8GB is more than enough (at least to post on a forum)

 

[waltonfc1]

The thing that is so absolutely stupid about this is that with an external display hooked up, you can still connect your iPad and run Sidecar on it, connecting it as a 2nd display. That absolutely is more taxing on CPU/GPU than a real 2nd display. This is just the worst kind of Apple BS. I'm an Apple fanboy, but it's things like this that make me want to leave the ecosystem.

i agree! I am so sick of these manufacturers building what they want us to buy instead of what we want or need.

 

[Howard Brazee]

The weird thing is that I was using 2 external HDMI TVs with my M1 iMac until MacOS updated.

 

[deevey]

The weird thing is that I was using 2 external HDMI TVs with my M1 iMac until MacOS updated.

Any possibility one of the TV's was using display link and the driver got borked during an update?

 

[Howard Brazee]

Nope. I didn't discover Display Link until I had a couple of hard weeks trying to get back my dual display after I upgraded MacOS. I forgot which version that was, I bought my M1 iMac as soon as they came out.

 

[deevey]

Nope. I didn't discover Display Link until I had a couple of hard weeks trying to get back my dual display after I upgraded MacOS. I forgot which version that was, I bought my M1 iMac as soon as they came out.

The SOC isn't capable of more than two display outputs (natively) - so it has to be the adaptor you were using that made it possible somehow.