Are you thinking about buying a new Mac Studio? Apple’s newest chips, the M4 Max and M3 Ultra, provide amazing speed, but which one is ideal for you?

Choosing the correct Mac Studio may be difficult, with comparable pricing. Does having more cores result in better performance? This article examines the key differences between the M3 Ultra and M4 Max Mac Studios, covering CPU, GPU, AI performance, and more. We’ll also look at benchmark results to help you make an informed decision.

Because some of the data is preliminary, check back for updates. So, let’s get started and find out which Mac Studio best fits your needs!

Diving into the Specs: M3 Ultra vs. M4 Max – What’s on Paper?

Knowing the official specifications of the Apple M3 Ultra and Apple M4 Max is important. It helps to lay the foundation for understanding the performance differences that manifest in real-world use cases and benchmark results. So, before discussing the specific test scores and usage scenarios, let’s examine the raw specifications of each chipset. By understanding the distinctions of each chipset on paper, it’ll be much easier to evaluate the practical effects when we look at the actual performance figures.

Below is a specification comparison table that offers you an easy way to compare each feature and specifications of the Apple M3 Ultra and Apple M4 Max.

Feature	Apple M3 Ultra	Apple M4 Max
Fabrication Process	TSMC 3nm (Likely Gen 1)	TSMC 3nm (Gen 2)
CPU	Up to 28 cores (20 Performance + 8 Efficiency)	Up to 16 cores (12 Performance + 4 Efficiency)
Max CPU Clock Speed	Up to 4.05GHz	Up to 4.5GHz
GPU	Up to 80 cores	Up to 40 cores
Hardware Ray Tracing	Yes	Yes
Media Engine	ProRes encode and decode engines	ProRes encode and decode engines
Neural Engine	32-core	16-core
Unified Memory (RAM)	96GB, 128GB, 192GB, 256GB, 512GB	36GB, 48GB, 64GB, 96GB, 128GB
Memory Bandwidth	Up to 800 GB/s	Up to 400 GB/s
Connectivity	Thunderbolt 4 ports, USB-A ports, HDMI, Ethernet, SD card slot	Thunderbolt 4 ports, USB-A ports, HDMI, Ethernet, SD card slot
Power Consumption	Varies depending on workload; generally higher than M4 Max due to more cores	Varies depending on workload; generally lower than M3 Ultra due to fewer cores

Fabrication Process: TSMC 3nm – Gen 1 vs. Gen 2

The fabrication process, which essentially refers to the technology used to manufacture the chip, is one of the core distinctions between the M3 Ultra and M4 Max. Both are based on TSMC’s 3nm process, but it’s believed that they use different generations of that process.

• M3 Ultra: Likely uses TSMC’s first-generation 3nm process. While still highly advanced, this first iteration may have limitations compared to later refinements.
• M4 Max: Uses TSMC’s second-generation 3nm process. This newer node should offer higher transistor density and greater efficiency. Meaning that for a given area, you can pack more transistors onto the M4 Max compared to the M3 Ultra, leading to improved performance and power consumption. It also allows for higher clock speeds and more complex designs.

This is important as it affects power efficiency, thermal performance, and overall performance capabilities of the chips.

CPU: Core Count, Clock Speed, and Architecture

The CPU is the central processing unit of the chip, responsible for handling the majority of the computational tasks.

• Core Count: The M3 Ultra has up to 28 CPU cores (20 Performance cores and 8 Efficiency cores). Performance cores are designed for demanding tasks, while efficiency cores handle background processes and lighter workloads to conserve power. The M4 Max has up to 16 cores (12 Performance cores and 4 Efficiency cores).
• Max Clock Speed: The M4 Max CPU has a higher clock speed of up to 4.5GHz, compared to the M3 Ultra’s 4.05GHz. The higher clock speed means that M4 Max may execute instructions faster.
• Architecture: A brief mention of Arm versions is that the M4 generation might incorporate advancements that improve instruction processing efficiency and overall performance. This is important because it affects the chip’s efficiency and its ability to handle new types of workloads.

GPU: Core Count and Ray Tracing

The GPU is responsible for graphics processing, including rendering images, videos, and games.

• Core Count: The M3 Ultra GPU has up to 80 cores, whereas the M4 Max GPU has up to 40 cores.
• Hardware Ray Tracing: Both the M3 Ultra and M4 Max support hardware ray tracing. Hardware ray tracing improves realism in graphics by simulating the way light interacts with objects. Hardware acceleration means these calculations can be done more efficiently.

Neural Engine: Accelerating AI

The Neural Engine is a dedicated hardware component designed to accelerate machine learning tasks.

• Core Count: The M3 Ultra Neural Engine has 32 cores, while the M4 Max Neural Engine has 16 cores.
• Operations per second (if available): If there is information available it would indicate the speed and efficiency. This spec indicates how fast each chip can process AI tasks and is critical for applications like image recognition and natural language processing.

Unified Memory (RAM): Capacity and Performance

Unified memory refers to the system where the CPU and GPU share the same pool of memory.

• Capacity: The M3 Ultra has memory options of 96GB, 128GB, 192GB, 256GB, and 512GB. The M4 Max has memory options of 36GB, 48GB, 64GB, 96GB, and 128GB.
• Memory Bandwidth: The M3 Ultra has a memory bandwidth of up to 800 GB/s, while the M4 Max has a memory bandwidth of up to 400 GB/s. Higher memory bandwidth helps with demanding tasks such as video editing, gaming, and running virtual machines.

CPU Performance: Core Count Isn’t Everything

The common assumption is that a higher core count in a CPU automatically means superior performance. However, initial benchmark results and real-world tests often reveal a more complex story. When comparing the CPU performance of the Apple M3 Ultra and M4 Max, this holds true.

Although the M3 Ultra boasts a significantly higher number of cores, particularly in its performance cores, the actual performance benefits aren’t always proportional to the increased core count. This section delves into the Geekbench 6.4 results to analyze the performance and try to explain why more cores do not automatically translate to better performance.

To start the analysis, here is the Geekbench 6.4 results for each chip:

• Apple M3 Ultra:
  • Single-Core Score: 3,249
  • Multi-Core Score: 28,345
• Apple M4 Max:
  • Single-Core Score: 4,082
  • Multi-Core Score: 26,474

The following are possible explanations of the results

TSMC 3nm Process Differences: Gen 1 vs. Gen 2 Explained

As previously stated, the M3 Ultra is expected to use a first-generation 3nm process by TSMC, while the M4 Max uses a more enhanced second-generation version. This is crucial. The 2nd generation node offers improvements in transistor density and energy efficiency, enabling better performance in M4 Max. This may also allow higher clock speeds and lower power consumption.

Architectural Improvements in M4: Optimizing Efficiency

Apple has made important architectural improvements to the M4, including a new instruction set and efficiency optimizations. The architectural improvements allow the M4 Max to perform more effectively per core, making up for the lower core count.

Clock Speed: Impact on Responsiveness

The M4 Max has a higher clock speed than the M3 Ultra. In single-threaded tasks where only one core is being used, the M4 Max’s ability to operate at a faster frequency gives it a substantial advantage. This leads to quicker application launches, more responsive user interfaces, and an overall better computing experience for tasks that don’t use multiple cores.

UltraFusion Bottleneck (M3 Ultra): Potential Limitations

Apple’s UltraFusion technology connects two M3 Max dies to make the M3 Ultra. Even though this approach allows for greater core numbers and memory capacity, it may cause latency or bandwidth constraints in some workloads. If the program has to transfer a lot of data between the two connected dies, the UltraFusion interconnect could become a bottleneck, negating some of the benefits of having more cores.

Geekbench Scaling Limitations: A Need for Broader Benchmarks

It is important to recognize that Geekbench may not completely utilize the M3 Ultra’s massive core count. Geekbench’s algorithms and types of tests may not be properly designed to take advantage of the M3 Ultra’s capabilities. For a more complete view, additional benchmarks like Cinebench (which is known for properly measuring multi-core performance) are required. These benchmarks may give a more accurate and nuanced picture of how well the M3 Ultra performs in multi-threaded applications.

GPU Performance: Raw Power vs. Optimized Efficiency

Moving on to graphics processing, the GPU is essential for tasks ranging from gaming and video editing to sophisticated 3D rendering. When comparing the Apple M3 Ultra and M4 Max, there is a considerable difference in the number of GPU cores: the M3 Ultra has up to 80 cores, while the M4 Max has half that number with up to 40 cores.

Let’s examine the early Geekbench GPU results to see how this disparity in core count impacts real-world performance. It’s important to remember that benchmarks are only one piece of the puzzle, and actual performance may vary depending on the workload and optimization.

• Apple M3 Ultra (80-core GPU): 259,277
• Apple M4 Max (40-core GPU): 192,889

Analysis

The M3 Ultra’s GPU outperforms the M4 Max GPU, but the performance improvement is not as dramatic as the core count difference would indicate. This suggests that while the M3 Ultra has more raw processing power, the M4 Max is extremely efficient in its usage of available resources.

Geekbench might not fully utilize the capabilities of either GPU. Real-world gaming or video editing scenarios may reveal more significant differences. Furthermore, different memory bandwidth must be considered.

Neural Engine and AI Workloads: M4 Max’s Surprising Edge

The Neural Engine is a specialized component in Apple’s chips designed to accelerate machine learning (ML) and artificial intelligence (AI) tasks. This is becoming more and more important as AI technologies become more integrated into everyday applications. The M3 Ultra has a 32-core Neural Engine, while the M4 Max has a 16-core Neural Engine. The Geekbench AI tests reveal another interesting twist in performance dynamics.

• Apple M3 Ultra (32-core Neural Engine):
  • Single Precision: 5,501
  • Half Precision: 30,149
  • Quantized: 33,362
• Apple M4 Max (16-core Neural Engine):
  • Single Precision: 5,968
  • Half Precision: 36,176
  • Quantized: 48,872

Analysis

The M4 Max outperforms the M3 Ultra in most Geekbench AI tests, despite having fewer Neural Engine cores. This surprising result shows that the M4 Max has considerable architectural and efficiency advantages.

Architectural improvements in the M4’s Neural Engine (more efficient design) could be the reason. Also the software optimization (Core ML framework might be better optimized for the M4).

While the M3 Ultra’s larger memory capacity is beneficial for loading massive AI models (e.g., 600B parameters), the M4 Max appears to offer faster processing of AI tasks.

Memory Bandwidth and Unified Memory: What You Need to Know

Memory bandwidth and unified memory are critical components of system performance, particularly for demanding tasks.

• Memory bandwidth determines how quickly the CPU and GPU can access data. Higher bandwidth generally leads to smoother performance, especially in memory-intensive tasks like video editing and 3D rendering.
• Unified memory allows the CPU and GPU to share the same pool of memory, eliminating the need to copy data between them. This significantly improves efficiency and performance.

When comparing M3 Ultra vs M4 Max for memory.

The M3 Ultra boasts higher memory bandwidth (up to 800GB/s) than the M4 Max (up to 400GB/s). The M3 Ultra offers significantly higher memory capacity options (up to 512GB) compared to the M4 Max (up to 128GB).

If you routinely work with massive 8K video projects or train extremely large AI models, the M3 Ultra might be worth the investment. But for everyday tasks, the M4 Max is likely more than sufficient.

Price vs. Performance: Finding the Sweet Spot

When comparing the M3 Ultra and M4 Max Mac Studios, it’s important to consider their cost-effectiveness.

The M4 Max Mac Studio is more affordable, the M3 Ultra Mac Studio is more expensive. While the M3 Ultra offers more raw power and higher memory capacity, the M4 Max delivers impressive performance at a significantly lower price point.

Consider different user needs such as for most professionals and creative users, the M4 Max provides an excellent balance of performance and affordability. The M3 Ultra is better suited for users who absolutely need the highest possible memory capacity and are willing to pay a premium.

Conclusion: Making the Right Choice

In conclusion, the Apple M4 Max and M3 Ultra offer excellent performance and capabilities, but they target somewhat different use cases. The M4 Max offers surprisingly competitive performance compared to the M3 Ultra. Architectural improvements in the M4 series are significant. The M3 Ultra’s higher core count doesn’t always translate to a proportional performance gain. Memory bandwidth and capacity are crucial for specific workloads.

Based on early benchmark results, the M4 Max Mac Studio represents the best value. It delivers exceptional performance at a more accessible price point. Remember, these are based on early benchmark results.

I recommend that you stay tuned for updates as more information becomes available. What are your thoughts on the M3 Ultra vs. M4 Max?

Related Posts

• How to Choose the BEST Power Bank: Avoid Capacity Scams & Maximize Charging Efficiency
• How to Decide if an OLED Screen Upgrade is Worth It: A Complete Buyer’s Guide