Better chance than intel, who delayed 10nm by at least 5 years and then didn’t ship it in volume for another 3, and it was still garbage.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Yearly Upgrades of M-series Chips
- Thread starter 4087258
- Start date
-
- Tags
- m3 chip m3 max m3 pro mac scary fast
- Sort by reaction score
Better chance than intel, who delayed 10nm by at least 5 years and then didn’t ship it in volume for another 3, and it was still garbage.
Some of us were arguing from the start that yearly updates were always the goal. Implementing such a roadmap is an enterprise of enormous complexity and some delays and setbacks are almost expected.
In fact, I believe that the initial plan was to have 3nm ready in 2023 and that both the A16 and the M2 Mac Pro are last minute plan B placeholder products.
In fact, I believe that the initial plan was to have 3nm ready in 2023 and that both the A16 and the M2 Mac Pro are last minute plan B placeholder products.
TSMC N3 was a 2023 product from day one. If you check TSMC public announcements in 2020, it was scheduled to enter volume production in 2H’22, which given the wafer cycle time would have missed iPhone 14 by a long shot.
If the M3 will be announced, it will make the Vision Pro look odd with the promised M2 chip… you’d expect the latest and greatest for their new flagship product next year. Or maybe it will get the M3 after all?
so what? How does that make a gap of 15 months or so into 12? There's simply no point to facile debates like this that have no grounding in facts.
M1 and M2 had a two frame launching because the base M chip came before the advanced M variants.
This time we may see the M3, M3 Pro and M3 Max at the same time, suggesting that it’s not a two frame launching anymore: it’s an unified synchronized development for all the variants.
Because of that, it’s hard to believe that Apple will stretch the M3 upgrades though 16 to 20 months after already releasing both the base and the pro chips at day one.
I just wanted to hypothesize this subject…
I am a little puzzled by your apology as I think this is an interesting topic to ponder
Last edited:
This is a rumour site where we are playing around with ideas and possibilities. If you are not interested in exploring possibilities then I suggest that this site is not for you. This is not a facile debate simply because everything is not fully set in concrete.
Thank you, sir! You know, I don’t want to get people upset or aggressive over such a hypothetical subject.
I don’t want to argue with anyone, that’s not my intention… So I just apologize 😄
Last edited:
Your speculation is good and I’ll still never understand why people show up to a rumour site and act like speculation is an affront to their existences.
Anyway, if we do get M3/Pro/Max on Monday then I’m not sure why anyone thinks they aren’t shooting for yearly. The Max reveal -> Ultra reveal took a bit over 5 months for the M1 and around that for M2 as well. And even if we assume the M2 Max was supposed to show up in October 2022 it’s at most 8 months. If we apply similar to the M3 line (simplistic, I know) we’ll probably get the Ultra at WWDC) and then there’ll only be M4 next to reveal and we can start this whole thing again. Plus I’d assume they want to get off of N3 quickly.
So yeah, yearly makes sense.
I think we'll get yearly updates from M3 and up.
I also think it was the plan since the beginning but the A16 ruined this plan. The A16 upgrade didn't bring any update to P-cores, E-cores or GPU that would translate well to an updated Mac device. They released the iPhone anyway because obviously they can't miss their yearly cadence on this product and the smartphone market is less attached to SoC upgrades.
That said I don't expect yearly upgrades of every device with a few skipping a year or on a 18-month timing.
I also think it was the plan since the beginning but the A16 ruined this plan. The A16 upgrade didn't bring any update to P-cores, E-cores or GPU that would translate well to an updated Mac device. They released the iPhone anyway because obviously they can't miss their yearly cadence on this product and the smartphone market is less attached to SoC upgrades.
That said I don't expect yearly upgrades of every device with a few skipping a year or on a 18-month timing.
Your italicized part is the part that doesn’t make sense.
1. There will be more Mac’s and probably the ultra later in the year. Still two part launch.
2. Even if that wasn’t the case, there is no reason to believe they would release the new suite sooner. None. Apple has other products that are 16-18 month cycles which is what these chips have already been. I don’t see a benefit to pushing these chips that fast for a slower upgrade cycle.
Money wasted. I doubt it. What may happen is having all Mac’s upgraded in unison. That would be cool. But also not necessary.
I think OP is talking about:
M1 Pro/Max - Oct 2021
M2 Pro/Max - (Rumoured to have slipped from Oct 2022)
M3 Pro/Max - Oct 2023
If the rumour about the M2 generation of MBPs being a few months late is true, it does indeed seem Apple wants to update the high end MacBook Pros yearly, at this time of year.
For me it makes sense. You see, if Apple is releasing the M Pro and Max at the same date as the M base, it may indicate that the M-series release is being compressed in a much tighter frame than the previous releases.
The first sentence in the first post of this thread is:
“Given the recent rumors on Apple releasing the M3 chip at the same time as M3 Pro and M3 Max, I believe this indicates that Apple is going to upgrade the M-series chips on a yearly basis from now on.”
Bloomberg: 13-Inch MacBook Pro With M3 Chip Unlikely to Be Announced at 'Scary Fast' Event
A new version of the 13-inch MacBook Pro featuring the M3 chip is unlikely to appear at Apple's "Scary Fast" Mac event next week,...
www.macrumors.com
Fantastic. And by upgrading both the Pro and Base chips at the same frame, it seems that the timing is much more narrower.
The first sentence in the first post of this thread is:
“Given the recent rumors on Apple releasing the M3 chip at the same time as M3 Pro and M3 Max, I believe this indicates that Apple is going to upgrade the M-series chips on a yearly basis from now on.”
Bloomberg: 13-Inch MacBook Pro With M3 Chip Unlikely to Be Announced at 'Scary Fast' Event
A new version of the 13-inch MacBook Pro featuring the M3 chip is unlikely to appear at Apple's "Scary Fast" Mac event next week,...
When I wrote “the M-series”, I meant both the base and the pro chips. We didn’t had that with M1 and M2, which leaded to a wide releasing frame.
And therefore?The first sentence in the first post of this thread is:
“Given the recent rumors on Apple releasing the M3 chip at the same time as M3 Pro and M3 Max, I believe this indicates that Apple is going to upgrade the M-series chips on a yearly basis from now on.”
Bloomberg: 13-Inch MacBook Pro With M3 Chip Unlikely to Be Announced at 'Scary Fast' Event
A new version of the 13-inch MacBook Pro featuring the M3 chip is unlikely to appear at Apple's "Scary Fast" Mac event next week,...
The base M-series hasn’t been updated annually. @IG88’s post already provides the exact launch dates. So you can’t expect someone to read the first sentence in the first post of your thread to take you seriously when it’s clearly incorrect.
If you want to talk about Pro/Max chips, that’s fine, but make it clear in your first post.
I think M3 gets announced, along with its high-end variants. It HAS to be. The name "Scary Fast" would be a strange choice if they don't actually have anything to announce that is scary fast relative to current products.
I suppose there's the possibility of some new, even higher-end variant of the M2 chip for their Mac Pros, particularly with the disappointments around how they compare to the now-discontinued Intel ones. Maybe this chip would further expand the tight RAM limit the new Mac Pro suffers from. Given what a niche product the Mac Pro is though, I don't feel like this would deserve a big announcement all by itself and I can't see a chip like that being available for their other Macs.
I think yearly is the only long-term possibility.
I know people basically settled on the 18-month idea at the beginning, but that always seemed incredibly strange to me, both because there was zero evidence for it and because of how insanely weird and impractical a schedule it would be for them to maintain with how the tech is researched and made. I mean, their A-series chips, which are based on the same tech, are already released annually. How exactly would that even work, to not sync the M-series chip releases to that in any way? I think this only sounded so natural to people because of the haphazard way they've had to release Macs in the past with how they were tied to Intel's fall-on-face unpredictable chip releases. It doesn't make sense anymore in the new world of Apple Silicon. Supply issues still leave them with some unpredictability for now but that will resolve over time as they mature and diversify their supply sources and as the COVID-19 crisis moves further and further away in the rearview mirror.
So that just leaves a 1-year or 2-year release cycle. 2 years would be the most sensible given how mature this tech is and how unnecessary frequent speed increases are to most of the target audience. It would also mean they could support their Macs for twice as long with the same effort, and a long support life is particularly important to Mac users. But it would sit poorly with their shareholders because of the reduced hype and profits. So I think we are going to be seeing 1 year. Certainly that's what the evidence has been pointing to very, very strongly for a while now.
This I think is a really clever point and probably the only thing that gives me any real pause about everything I said above. Maybe though they just quietly update it to the M3. Or they leave it on the M2 because there's an understanding that this is a niche, 1.0 release that they have no expectation of widespread adoption for yet. I would also imagine, given the heat, weight, and sizing nightmare they've had with this thing that it's non-trivial to equip it with the latest and greatest chip generation going forward and maybe they are resigned long-term to that reality.
I'll end this by pointing out that they don't have to release products to announce them. They could announce new MacBook Pros for example but not actually release them until next summer. They could even just use this event to showcase the performance of the M3 chips that future devices will come with, sort of like what they did when they announced Apple Silicon in the first place.
I suppose there's the possibility of some new, even higher-end variant of the M2 chip for their Mac Pros, particularly with the disappointments around how they compare to the now-discontinued Intel ones. Maybe this chip would further expand the tight RAM limit the new Mac Pro suffers from. Given what a niche product the Mac Pro is though, I don't feel like this would deserve a big announcement all by itself and I can't see a chip like that being available for their other Macs.
I think yearly is the only long-term possibility.
I know people basically settled on the 18-month idea at the beginning, but that always seemed incredibly strange to me, both because there was zero evidence for it and because of how insanely weird and impractical a schedule it would be for them to maintain with how the tech is researched and made. I mean, their A-series chips, which are based on the same tech, are already released annually. How exactly would that even work, to not sync the M-series chip releases to that in any way? I think this only sounded so natural to people because of the haphazard way they've had to release Macs in the past with how they were tied to Intel's fall-on-face unpredictable chip releases. It doesn't make sense anymore in the new world of Apple Silicon. Supply issues still leave them with some unpredictability for now but that will resolve over time as they mature and diversify their supply sources and as the COVID-19 crisis moves further and further away in the rearview mirror.
So that just leaves a 1-year or 2-year release cycle. 2 years would be the most sensible given how mature this tech is and how unnecessary frequent speed increases are to most of the target audience. It would also mean they could support their Macs for twice as long with the same effort, and a long support life is particularly important to Mac users. But it would sit poorly with their shareholders because of the reduced hype and profits. So I think we are going to be seeing 1 year. Certainly that's what the evidence has been pointing to very, very strongly for a while now.
This I think is a really clever point and probably the only thing that gives me any real pause about everything I said above. Maybe though they just quietly update it to the M3. Or they leave it on the M2 because there's an understanding that this is a niche, 1.0 release that they have no expectation of widespread adoption for yet. I would also imagine, given the heat, weight, and sizing nightmare they've had with this thing that it's non-trivial to equip it with the latest and greatest chip generation going forward and maybe they are resigned long-term to that reality.
I'll end this by pointing out that they don't have to release products to announce them. They could announce new MacBook Pros for example but not actually release them until next summer. They could even just use this event to showcase the performance of the M3 chips that future devices will come with, sort of like what they did when they announced Apple Silicon in the first place.
Last edited:
I’m sorry if I didn’t make it clear for you at first, english is not my main language.
I’m aware that the M-series hasn’t been updated yearly, but the recent rumors suggest that an iMac with a base M3 will be released alongside the MacBook Pro 14” and 16” (M3 Pro and M3 Max). This lead us to wonder if Apple will narrower the time frame by releasing both the base and the pro chips at day one, since Apple didn’t ever released the pro chips so soon.
Last edited:
I hope what you hope for doesn’t happen. Yearly cycles are amazing and I hope the upgrade schedule will stabilize around them.