Can the future M4 MacBooks potentially support thunderbolt 5 even though the iPad doesn't?

[Nimrad]

I'm a bit curious to know if the M4's quite early unveil will mean it might not support thunderbolt 5?

I'm planning a bit ahead, and TB5 is probably the reason I wanna upgrade my M1 Pro MBP because I want the bandwidth for one cable connection to my office gear.

 

[altaic]

What’s with the clickbait title? 🙄

 

[Nimrad]

What’s with the clickbait title? 🙄

Just tried to make it search-friendly if anyone else was wondering about the same thing.

 

[MayaUser]

then edit the title and say thunderbolt 5 otherwise is miss-leading and can be closed

 

[dmccloud]

The OP is not only misleading, but it's nothing more than speculation. Looking at M1 and M2 based iPads, what protocols they support have had no bearing on what is supported on the Mac lineups. Why would M4 be any different?

 

[Nimrad]

Looking at M1 and M2 based iPads, what protocols they support have had no bearing on what is supported on the Mac lineups. Why would M4 be any different?

Thanks that’s a good point. My reasoning was that at least for Intel I read that the controllers are actually on-die, so CPU-support is a prerequisite. If that’s not the case for Apple that still leaves me some hope

 

[bill-p]

I'm a bit curious to know if the M4's quite early unveil will mean it might not support thunderbolt 5?

There will most likely be an M4 MacBook Air.

And it may likely still only support 1 external monitor aside from the internal one or you may have to close the lid to support 1 extra one.

That being the case, Thunderbolt 5 would be absolutely wasted. Plus the controller will waste more die space, if not more power. So it does actually make sense for Apple to not include support in M4. Maybe they'll save that for M4 Pro and M4 Max.

 

[JPack]

That being the case, Thunderbolt 5 would be absolutely wasted. Plus the controller will waste more die space, if not more power. So it does actually make sense for Apple to not include support in M4. Maybe they'll save that for M4 Pro and M4 Max.

The speed wouldn’t be wasted, it would still benefit those who plug in a dock with multiple fast storage devices for example. The only thing holding back Apple from calling it TB4/TB5 is lack of dual monitor support.

 

[Nimrad]

it would still benefit those who plug in a dock with multiple fast storage devices for example

I’m not sure of bandwidth requirements for DisplayPort vs HDMI, but just a 4k@120hz HDMI-signal takes up to 40-48 Gbit/s. I’d just love to have a dock that will do that signal together with everything else like 10Gbit Ethernet, 1-2 10Gbit USBs and low speed peripherals.

 

[bill-p]

The speed wouldn’t be wasted, it would still benefit those who plug in a dock with multiple fast storage devices for example. The only thing holding back Apple from calling it TB4/TB5 is lack of dual monitor support.

It does seem likely that TB4/5 will be another differentiator between the Pro line and the Air line. Apple does push for more I/O in the Pro line, while the Air line has always been more about "just the bare minimum".

 

[EugW]

It does seem likely that TB4/5 will be another differentiator between the Pro line and the Air line. Apple does push for more I/O in the Pro line, while the Air line has always been more about "just the bare minimum".

Maybe for laptops, but the non-Pro Mac mini also has Thunderbolt 4.

 

[theluggage]

It does seem likely that TB4/5 will be another differentiator between the Pro line and the Air line

Maybe for laptops, but the non-Pro Mac mini also has Thunderbolt 4.

They all have USB4 ports that support 40Gbps, plus many new "Thunderbolt 4" (actually USB 4) features including USB 3.x tunnelling and multi-port downstream USB4 hub support. The ports on a MBA can do anything a TB4 port can do except support dual external displays.

Since Intel opened up the TB3 spec and USB4 appeared, "Thunderbolt 4" is basically just an additional Intel branding & certification for USB 4 implementations which makes a bunch of optional features from the USB4/USB-C standard optional.

AFAIK The only reason why the M2 MBA and M2 iPad specs say TB3 while the M2 Mac Mini specs say TB4 is that Intel's Thunderbolt 4 branding requires support for two external displays via Thunderbolt. ...and that's nothing to do with the TB ports or TB controllers themselves: the M2 SoC can only support two displays total; and whereas the MBA and iPad need one of those for the internal display, the Mini doesn't have an internal display so they're both available over Thunderbolt.

Hence, the M2 Mini gets "Thunderbolt 4" ports while the MBA and iPad get "Thunderbolt/USB 4" ports - and anything with a M2 Pro or higher processor supports 3 or more displays, so its ports can be called TB4.

The only slight mystery is why the M3 Airs - which do support dual external displays if you close the lid - don't now claim TB4, but maybe the "closing the lid" bit doesn't meet Intel's specs or perhaps Apple just aren't bothering since the only practical upshot would be the words "Thunderbolt 4" in the specs.

Thunderbolt 5 will, presumably, be a similar gold-plating of the USB 4 2.0 80Gbps standard - so any future Mac that still doesn't support two external displays will be "Thunderbolt/USB4 2.0" rather than "Thunderbolt 5".

The fact that the new M4 iPad specs don't mention USB4 2.0 may mean that the M4 series won't be getting TB5 or it may mean they've decided not to support it on the iPad or - given that it's just taken me 6 paragraphs to describe this dumpster fire - they're just keeping their powder dry until they can launch a M5 Pro with Thunderbolt 5 without ifs and buts.

 

[EugW]

given that it's just taken me 6 paragraphs to describe this dumpster fire

Gold!

I'm just glad they have USB4 and Thunderbolt 3+. I get the impression that older USB 3 / TB 3 hubs may have been more a mixed bag. Might just be a coincidence, or maybe because there were so many more USB 3 chipsets out there.

 

[PaulD-UK]

Quote: "...older USB 3 / TB 3 hubs..."

Para 7 😵‍💫: TB3 isn't a hub technology (but USB 3.* Gen* is), it's daisy chain, like FireWire or SCSI.
TB4's main advance was to make it hub-capable.

 

[EugW]

Quote: "...older USB 3 / TB 3 hubs..."

Para 7 😵‍💫: TB3 isn't a hub technology (but USB 3.* Gen* is), it's daisy chain, like FireWire or SCSI.
TB4's main advance was to make it hub-capable.

I should have said docks not hubs, but yes I had to wait until TB4 to get an actual TB hub. Thanks for the correction.

However, I was also referring to compatibility and usability issues, including such seemingly “minor” things as waking up a computer from sleep. I am reminded now that although it was supported on TB3, it wasn’t actually required, whereas this is mandatory on TB4.

 

[throAU]

I'm a bit curious to know if the M4's quite early unveil will mean it might not support thunderbolt 5?

I'm planning a bit ahead, and TB5 is probably the reason I wanna upgrade my M1 Pro MBP because I want the bandwidth for one cable connection to my office gear.

Maybe the m4 pro will.

🤷‍♂️

 

[DaniTheFox]

Maybe for laptops, but the non-Pro Mac mini also has Thunderbolt 4.

Yes, because on a mini you don’t have to close a lid to get two external monitor running. So they can name it TB4.
Edit: theluggage already explained.

 

[theluggage]

I'm just glad they have USB4 and Thunderbolt 3+. I get the impression that older USB 3 / TB 3 hubs may have been more a mixed bag.

When it comes to docks/hubs TB3 vs TB4 is a bit swings and roundabouts and the two standards are kinda complementary - see e.g.

What’s the Difference Between Thunderbolt 3 and Thunderbolt 4?

Thunderbolt 3 and Thunderbolt 4 feature different chipset designs aimed at different purposes. Here's what you need to know to pick the best Thunderbolt peripheral for your needs.

www.owc.com

I think this largely comes down to what peripheral chipsets are currently available - at the moment, TB hubs and USB tunnelling are the only real advantage of TB4/USB4 over TB3 so there's really no need for non-hubs to be called TB4. Since TB5/USB4 2.0 is going to add faster speeds so I have no idea how the concept of TB4 and TB3 being "complementary" is going to expand to encompass that...

I love how having one, single unified connector makes everything so much simpler!

 

[DaniTheFox]

When it comes to docks/hubs TB3 vs TB4 is a bit swings and roundabouts and the two standards are kinda complementary - see e.g.

What’s the Difference Between Thunderbolt 3 and Thunderbolt 4?

Thunderbolt 3 and Thunderbolt 4 feature different chipset designs aimed at different purposes. Here's what you need to know to pick the best Thunderbolt peripheral for your needs.

www.owc.com

I think this largely comes down to what peripheral chipsets are currently available - at the moment, TB hubs and USB tunnelling are the only real advantage of TB4/USB4 over TB3 so there's really no need for non-hubs to be called TB4. Since TB5/USB4 2.0 is going to add faster speeds so I have no idea how the concept of TB4 and TB3 being "complementary" is going to expand to encompass that...

I love how having one, single unified connector makes everything so much simpler!

I would like to have on single port as well. But we have two huge industries, one mostly HDMI (Beamers), one DP. You need always a dongle. A lot of people don’t want that. So apple have now both back on the MacBook Pro.
And boy HDMI 2.1 has some timely and functional advantages over DP2.0. And DP is part of TB.

 

[theluggage]

And boy HDMI 2.1 has some timely and functional advantages over DP2.0. And DP is part of TB.

Well, there is/was HDMI (over USBC) ALT Mode which kinda flopped - thankfully, because that would have meant two different kinds of USB-C to HDMI adapter...

HDMI and DP have been playing leapfrog for years - so I daresay DP2-point-something will become the new shiny thing in the near future, until HDMI 3XL++ comes out.

...and that's one problem with a "universal" port like USB-C that tries to lump together a diverse bunch of current, upcoming and legacy technology - something in the standard is always going to be out of date. TB3 was stuck with DisplayPort 1.2a for a long time after DP1.3/1.4 specs came out, and had to use two virtual DP connections to do 5k - which consequently nobbled DP Alt Mode over USB-C (because so many USB-C ports were driven by Intel TB controllers).

USB-C is pretty well established now (I think Apple were way premature to make it the only interface on Macs as early as 2016) so it isn't going away. The connector is much nicer than microUSB for mobile devices and small peripherals, and while Lightning was a bit better mechanically, it was running out of bandwidth so a "Lightning 2" would have been needed by now - but the advantages of having a common charging connector outweigh that. Anyway, Apple were a major player in USB-C development so it kinda sorta is Lightning 2.

...but I still think having USB-C only is a backward step on any device big enough to accommodate separate power, data and display ports - those are separate, independent and scarce resources provided by the chipset. Sharing them equally with multiple independent ports adds complexity an inevitably means fewer ports in total, that leaves you dependent on using external docks and dongles as break-out devices. I could really use more USB ports (either 3.1/A or C would do) on my desktop Mac but 1-2 of the available TB ports are connected to displays which don't need USB bandwidth.