Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Apple unveils M3, M3 Pro, and M3 Max

apple.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

791–800 of 1001 posts

Re: Apple unveils M3, M3 Pro, and M3 Max

#791

Post by semireg »

Fethbita wrote: post #756

I have found some deals on M1 Max Macbook Pros with 10-core CPU, 32-core GPU, 64GB RAM and 2TB storage. Does it make sense to go with those or with base M3 Pro with 11-core CPU, 14-core GPU, 18GB RAM 512GB storage which is the same price?

Fwiw, I have a 16" M2 Pro and had a close call with losing it to water damage, so I picked up a M2 Air and it is FASTER than the Pro for most of my jobs (electron/Xcode dev). The Air is so much lighter that I much prefer it to the Pro. The Pro now lives at my desk via TB, and the Air in my backpack for pretty much everything else. Weirdly, when I look at GeekBench browser I see that the M2 Pro should be faster, but at the time I've got screenshots of it being a Pro @ 2.7 GHz and Air @ 3.5 GHz... and I just checked again right now (at my desk) and the Pro is running at 3.29 GHz, so the dynamic CPU scaling must have had an effect. Yet, the actual work doesn't lie, and everything feels super snappy on the Air. Truth to YMMV.

Re: Apple unveils M3, M3 Pro, and M3 Max

#792

Post by IggleSniggle »

nicoburns wrote: post #699
aatd86 wrote: post #644

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wait telemetry is opt-out? And I've never heard people complain? Genuinely surprised as it seems to be quite a commonly controversial thing amongst devs.

It’s opt-out, but it’s not enabled silently. It’s a pre-ticked checkbox on a screen you have to review when you first setup the machine (and when you do a major version OS upgrade). IMO that’s quite different to something that’s just silently on by default, and requires you to set an environment variable or run a command to opt out.

I don't think it's pre-checked, is it? I thought it was Yes/No buttons

Re: Apple unveils M3, M3 Pro, and M3 Max

#793

Post by mrcwinn »

paulpan wrote: post #784
kivlad wrote: post #160

A few things I noticed, as I'm seeing the variety of SKUs becoming more complex. - Note that memory bandwidth is down. M2 Pro had 200GB/s, M3 Pro only has 150GB/s. M3 Max only has 400GB/s on the higher binned part. - Just like the low-spec M3 14" has one fewer Thunderbolt port, it also doesn't officially support Thunderbolt 4 (like M1/M2 before it) - The M3 Pro loses the option for an 8TB SSD. Likely because it was a…

The new M3 14" MBP seems to be a red herring - why does it even exist? Why not just refresh the MBA instead? An obvious rule of thumb is for "Pro"-branded laptops to only use "Pro"-branded chips. It's what they follow for the iPhone lineup, but I suppose iPad Pros also use non-Pro chips. Just seems like a very confusing SKU to create, and definitely something Steve wouldn't approve of.

I personally struggle with the 14". It feels too small to be productive on, at least for coding. Anyone else experience this?

And yet, the MBA's screen in comparison is serviceable and nice, but nothing outstanding. That's the case for the MBP 14 (when the 16 is just too large and bulky).

Re: Apple unveils M3, M3 Pro, and M3 Max

#794

Post by cpuguy83 »

bouke wrote: post #767
Condition1952 wrote: post #665

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Parallels is an overpriced rubbish with stupid limitations. I’m switching to WMWare or VMWare as of right now

Parallels used to be front-runner with better support for new macOS features. vmWare used to lag behind with weird issues. This is why I switched from vmWare Fusion to Parallels Desktop a few years back. What are these limitations you speak of? And what makes it rubbish?

Probably the biggest complaint is fusion is now free (for personal use) and Parallels is a subscription.

Also you can get other free vm managers on Macs now since it ships with a hypervisor and vm framework.

Re: Apple unveils M3, M3 Pro, and M3 Max

#795

Post by ffgjgf1 »

3c6bYDXLMj wrote: post #628
duped wrote: post #453

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Then why do they come with (low end) consumer level storage and memory capacity?

Different people have different needs. I certainly need a MacBook Pro for my work, but I use next to no storage. I’ve never purchase beyond the minimum storage for an Apple computer. I did however up the processor on my current MacBook Pro. Minimum 8GB RAM is more universally egregious but I’m not going to sit here and justify my own exception whilst discounting the possibility that 8GB works for others.

The cost for adding an extra 8GB would be insignificant for Apple, though. The only reason they don’t is to upsell higher tier models

Re: Apple unveils M3, M3 Pro, and M3 Max

#796

Post by cpuguy83 »

huytersd wrote: post #501
baggy_trough wrote: post #499

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can run ARM Windows under Parallels, which is good enough for me.

Ah just updated my comment. I really dislike how slow Parallels is.

For gaming sure... but anything else... hypervisors are very good these days.

Re: Apple unveils M3, M3 Pro, and M3 Max

#797

Post by rewmie »

JCharante wrote: post #698
rewmie wrote: post #299

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Any reason for not upgrading? Why is this sort of question always framed as if people have to provide a justification for not buying a new model, as if spending money on the new shiny without any reason is normal or desirable? We live in a day and age where hardware bought a decade ago still packs enough punch to run most of today's software without any hiccup. Why would anyone waste their cash to replace something…

They mentioned their coworker and most companies have upgrade policies. Just fill in a form every x years and you get a shiny new laptop (and depending on where you work, you’ll get to keep your old one as a gift)

> They mentioned their coworker and most companies have upgrade policies.

Upgrade policies aren't driven by new requirements, or performance improvements. Some companies have mandatory hardware replacement policies which mostly serve to allow their tech support staff to standardized on a small number of devices. Getting a M3 MacBook Pro replacement just because your employer doesn't want to maintain an Intel MacBook Pro is hardly indicative that a M3 is worth spending money on, let alone replace a M2 or even M1 MacBook Pro.

Re: Apple unveils M3, M3 Pro, and M3 Max

#799

Post by Condition1952 »

bouke wrote: post #767
Condition1952 wrote: post #665

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Parallels is an overpriced rubbish with stupid limitations. I’m switching to WMWare or VMWare as of right now

Parallels used to be front-runner with better support for new macOS features. vmWare used to lag behind with weird issues. This is why I switched from vmWare Fusion to Parallels Desktop a few years back. What are these limitations you speak of? And what makes it rubbish?

8 GB max of RAM is a software limitation not present in the more expensive tier. I suspect it is not a technical limitation, just greed.

Re: Apple unveils M3, M3 Pro, and M3 Max

#800

Post by dmix »

yipbub wrote: post #600
rickdeckard wrote: post #579

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Given that there has never been any public incidents about it and what we know about similar defaults I would be surprised if Apple is getting less than 95% opt-in rate. A 95% opt-in rate is INSANELY high for any type of usage-stat opt-in, everything above 50% is usually outstanding. What is known about "similar defaults"?

It seems like the comment above is describing out-out and the it pesters you to opt-back in if you opt-out.

Major updates are infrequent maybe once a year if you always update, it’s not pestering you. And the UI makes it very easy to skip unlike some designs.
Post reply on HN