Regardless of what Apple does with the Mac Pro, the desktop makes less sense than ever in the Apple Silicon era. Part of the appeal of the early 2010s and the 2019 Mac Pro towers was their internal expandability, particularly with respect to storage, graphics cards, and RAM. But while the Apple Silicon Mac Pro does include six internal PCI Express slots, it supports neither RAM upgrades nor third-party GPUs from Nvidia, AMD, or Intel. Thunderbolt 5’s 120 Gbps transfer speeds are also more than fast enough to support high-speed external storage devices.
That leaves even the most powerful of power users with few practical reasons to prefer a $7,000 Mac Pro tower to a $4,000 Mac Studio. And that would be true even if both desktops used the same chip—currently, the M3 Ultra Studio comes with more and newer CPU cores, newer GPU cores, and 32GB more RAM for that price, making the comparison even more lopsided.
Mac Pro aside, the Mac should have a pretty active 2026. Every laptop other than the entry-level 14-inch MacBook Pro should get an Apple M5 upgrade, with Pro and Max chips coming for the higher-end Pros. Those chips, plus the M5 Ultra, would give Apple all the ingredients it would need to refresh the iMac, Mac mini, and Mac Studio lineups as well.
Insistent rumors also indicate that Apple will be introducing a new, lower-cost MacBook model with an iPhone-class chip inside, a device that seems made to replace the 2020 M1 MacBook Air that Apple has continued to sell via Walmart for between $600 and $650. It remains to be seen whether this new MacBook would remain a Walmart exclusive or if Apple also plans to offer the laptop through other retailers and its own store.
The Game Overlay in macOS Tahoe. Credit: Andrew Cunningham
Tahoe’s new Game Overlay doesn’t add features so much as it groups existing gaming-related features to make them more easily accessible.
The overlay makes itself available any time you start a game, either via a keyboard shortcut or by clicking the rocketship icon in the menu bar while a game is running. The default view includes brightness and volume settings, toggles for your Mac’s energy mode (for turning on high-performance or low-power mode, when they’re available), a toggle for Game Mode, and access to controller settings when you’ve got one connected.
The second tab in the overlay displays achievements, challenges, and leaderboards for the game you’re playing—though only if they offer Apple’s implementation of those features. Achievements for games installed from Steam, for example, aren’t visible. And the last tab is for social features, like seeing your friends list or controlling chat settings (again, when you’re using Apple’s implementation).
More granular notification summaries
I didn’t think the Apple Intelligence notification summaries were very useful when they launched in iOS 18 and macOS 15 Sequoia last year, and I don’t think iOS 26 or Tahoe really changes the quality of those summaries in any immediately appreciable way. But following a controversy earlier this year where the summaries botched major facts in breaking news stories, Apple turned notification summaries for news apps off entirely while it worked on fixes.
Those fixes, as we’ve detailed elsewhere, are more about warning users of potential inaccuracies than about preventing those inaccuracies in the first place.
Apple now provides three broad categories of notification summaries: those for news and entertainment apps, those for communication and social apps, and those for all other kinds of apps. Summaries for each category can be turned on or off independently, and the news and entertainment category has a big red disclaimer warning users to “verify information” in the individual news stories before jumping to conclusions. Summaries are italicized, get a special icon, and a “summarized by Apple Intelligence” badge, just to make super-ultra-sure that people are aware they’re not taking in raw data.
Personally, I think if Apple can’t fix the root of the problem in a situation like this, then it’s best to take the feature out of iOS and macOS entirely rather than risk giving even one person information that’s worse or less accurate than the information they already get by being a person on the Internet in 2025.
As we wrote a few months ago, asking a relatively small on-device language model to accurately summarize any stack of notifications covering a wide range of topics across a wide range of contexts is setting it up to fail. It does work OK when summarizing one or two notifications, or when summarizing straightforward texts or emails from a single person. But for anything else, be prepared for hit-or-miss accuracy and usefulness.
Relocated volume and brightness indicators
The pop-ups you see when adjusting the system volume or screen brightness have been redesigned and moved. The indicators used to appear as large rounded squares, centered on the lower half of your primary display. The design had changed over the years, but this was where they’ve appeared throughout the 25-year existence of Mac OS X.
Now, both indicators appear in the upper-right corner of the screen, glassy rectangles that pop out from items on the menu bar. They’ll usually appear next to the Control Center menu bar item, but the volume indicator will pop out of the Sound icon if it’s visible.
New low battery alert
Tahoe picks up an iPhone-ish low-battery alert on laptops. Credit: Andrew Cunningham
Tahoe tweaks the design of macOS’ low battery alert notification. A little circle-shaped meter (in the same style as battery meters in Apple’s Batteries widgets) shows you in bright red just how close your battery is to being drained.
This notification still shows up separately from others and can’t be dismissed, though it doesn’t need to be cleared and will go away on its own. It starts firing off when your laptop’s battery hits 10 percent and continues to go off when you drop another percentage point from there (it also notified me without the percentage readout changing, seemingly at random, as if to annoy me badly enough to plug my computer in more quickly).
The notification frequency and the notification thresholds can’t be changed, if this isn’t something you want to be reminded about or if it’s something you want to be reminded about even earlier. But you could possibly use the battery level trigger in Shortcuts to customize your Mac’s behavior a bit.
Recovery mode changes
A new automated recovery tool in macOS Tahoe’s recovery volume. Credit: Andrew Cunningham
Tahoe’s version of the macOS Recovery mode gets a new look to match the rest of the OS, but there are a few other things going on, too.
If you’ve ever had a problem getting your Mac to boot, or if you’ve ever just wanted to do a totally fresh install of the operating system, you may have run into the Mac’s built-in recovery environment before. On an Apple Silicon Mac, you can usually access it by pressing and holding the power button when you start up your Mac and clicking the Options button to start up using the hidden recovery volume rather than the main operating system volume.
Tahoe adds a new tool called the Device Recovery Assistant to the recovery environment, accessible from the Utilities menu. This automated tool “will look for any problems” with your system volume “and attempt to resolve them if found.”
Maybe the Recovery Assistant will actually solve your boot problems, and maybe it won’t—it doesn’t tell you much about what it’s doing, beyond needing to unlock FileVault on my system volume to check it out. But it’s one more thing to try if you’re having serious problems with your Mac and you’re not ready to countenance a clean install yet.
The web browser in the recovery environment is still WebKit, but it’s not Safari-branded anymore, and it sheds a lot of Safari features you wouldn’t want or need in a temporary OS. Credit: Andrew Cunningham
Apple has made a couple of other tweaks to the recovery environment, beyond adding a Liquid Glass aesthetic. The recovery environment’s built-in web browser is simply called Web Browser, and while it’s still based on the same WebKit engine as Safari, it doesn’t have Safari’s branding or its settings (or other features that are extraneous to a temporary recovery environment, like a bookmarks menu). The Terminal window picks up the new Clear theme, new SF Mono Terminal typeface, and the new default 120-row-by-30-column size.
A new disk image format
Not all Mac users interact with disk images regularly, aside from opening them up periodically to install an app or restore an old backup. But among other things, disk images are used by Apple’s Virtualization framework, which makes it relatively simple to run macOS and Linux virtual machines on the platform for testing and other things. But the RAW disk image format used by older macOS versions can come with quite severe performance penalties, even with today’s powerful chips and fast PCI Express-connected SSDs.
Enter the Apple Sparse Image Format, or ASIF. Apple’s developer documentation says that because ASIF images’ “intrinsic structure doesn’t depend on the host file system’s capabilities,” they “transfer more efficiently between hosts or disks.” The upshot is that reading files from and writing files to these images should be a bit closer to your SSD’s native performance (Howard Oakley at The Eclectic Light Company has some testing that suggests significant performance improvements in many cases, though it’s hard to make one-to-one comparisons because testing of the older image formats was done on older hardware).
The upshot is that disk images should be capable of better performance in Tahoe, which will especially benefit virtual machines that rely on disk images. This could benefit the lightweight virtualization apps like VirtualBuddy and Viable that mostly exist to provide a front end for the Virtualization framework, as well as virtualization apps like Parallels that offer support for Windows.
Quantum-safe encryption support
You don’t have a quantum computer on your desk. No one does, outside of labs where this kind of technology is being tested. But when or if they become more widely used, they’ll render many industry-standard forms of encryption relatively easy to break.
First, was Apple providing fewer updates and fewer years of software support to Macs based on Intel chips as it worked to transition the entire lineup to its internally developed Apple Silicon? And second, how long could Intel Mac owners reasonably expect to keep getting updates?
The answer to the first question has always been “it depends, but generally yes.” And this year, we have a definitive answer to the second question: For the bare handful of Intel Macs it supports, macOS 26 Tahoe will be the final new version of the operating system to support any of Intel’s chips.
To its credit, Apple has also clearly spelled this out ahead of time rather than pulling the plug on Intel Macs with no notice. The company has also said that it plans to provide security updates for those Macs for two years after Tahoe is replaced by macOS 27 next year. These Macs aren’t getting special treatment—this has been Apple’s unspoken, unwritten policy for macOS security updates for decades now—but to look past its usual “we don’t comment on our future plans” stance to give people a couple years of predictability is something we’ve been pushing Apple to do for a long time.
With none of the tea leaf reading left to do, we can now present a fairly definitive look at how Apple has handled the entire Intel transition, compare it to how the PowerPC-to-Intel switch went two decades ago, and predict what it might mean about support for Apple Silicon Macs.
The data
We’ve assembled an epoch-spanning spreadsheet of every PowerPC or Intel Mac Apple has released since the original iMac kicked off the modern era of Apple back in 1998. On that list, we’ve recorded the introduction date for each Mac, the discontinuation date (when it was either replaced or taken off the market), the version of macOS it shipped with, and the final version of macOS it officially supported.
For those macOS versions, we’ve recorded the dates they received their last major point update—these are the feature-adding updates these releases get when they’re Apple’s latest and greatest version of macOS, as macOS 15 Sequoia is right now. After replacing them, Apple releases security-only patches and Safari browser updates for old macOS versions for another two years after replacing them, so we’ve also recorded the dates that those Macs would have received their final security update. For Intel Macs that are still receiving updates (versions 13, 14, and 15) and macOS 26 Tahoe, we’ve extrapolated end-of-support dates based on Apple’s past practices.
A 27-inch iMac model. It’s still the only Intel Mac without a true Apple Silicon replacement. Credit: Andrew Cunningham
We’re primarily focusing on two time spans: from the date of each Mac’s introduction to the date it stopped receiving major macOS updates, and from the date of each Mac’s introduction to the date it stopped receiving any updates at all. We consider any Macs inside either of these spans to be actively supported; Macs that are no longer receiving regular updates from Apple will gradually become less secure and less compatible with modern apps as time passes. We measure by years of support rather than number of releases, which controls for Apple’s transition to a once-yearly release schedule for macOS back in the early 2010s.
We’ve also tracked the time between each Mac model’s discontinuation and when it stopped receiving updates. This is how Apple determines which products go on its “vintage” and “obsolete” hardware lists, which determine the level of hardware support and the kinds of repairs that the company will provide.
We have lots of detailed charts, but here are some highlights:
For all Mac models tracked, the average Mac receives about 6.6 years of macOS updates that add new features, plus another two years of security-only updates.
If you only count the Intel era, the average is around seven years of macOS updates, plus two years of security-only patches.
Most (though not all) Macs released since 2016 come in lower than either of these averages, indicating that Apple has been less generous to most Intel Macs since the Apple Silicon transition began.
The three longest-lived Macs are still the mid-2007 15- and 17-inch MacBook Pros, the mid-2010 Mac Pro, and the mid-2007 iMac, which received new macOS updates for around nine years after their introduction (and security updates for around 11 years).
The shortest-lived Mac is still the late-2008 version of the white MacBook, which received only 2.7 years of new macOS updates and another 3.3 years of security updates from the time it was introduced. (Late PowerPC-era and early Intel-era Macs are all pretty bad by modern standards.)
The charts
If you bought a Mac any time between 2016 and 2020, you’re generally settling for fewer years of software updates than you would have gotten in the recent past. If you bought a Mac released in 2020, the tail end of the Intel era when Apple Silicon Macs were around the corner, your reward is the shortest software support window since 2006.
There are outliers in either direction. The sole iMac Pro, introduced in 2017 as Apple tried to regain some of its lost credibility with professional users, will end up with 7.75 years of updates plus another two years of security updates when all is said and done. Buyers of 2018–2020 MacBook Airs and the two-port version of the 2020 13-inch MacBook Pro, however, are treated pretty poorly, getting not quite 5.5 years of updates (plus two years of security patches) on average from the date they were introduced.
That said, most Macs usually end up getting a little over six years of macOS updates and two more years of security updates. If that’s a year or two lower than the recent past, it’s also not ridiculously far from the historical average.
If there’s something to praise here, it’s interesting that Apple doesn’t seem to treat any of its Macs differently based on how much they cost. Now that we have a complete overview of the Intel era, breaking out the support timelines by model rather than by model year shows that a Mac mini doesn’t get dramatically more or less support than an iMac or a Mac Pro, despite costing a fraction of the price. A MacBook Air doesn’t receive significantly more or less support than a MacBook Pro.
These are just averages, and some models are lucky while others are not. The no-adjective MacBook that Apple has sold on and off since 2006 is also an outlier, with fewer years of support on average than the other Macs.
If there’s one overarching takeaway, it’s that you should buy new Macs as close to the date of their introduction as possible if you want to maximize your software support window. Especially for Macs that were sold continuously for years and years—the 2013 and 2019 Mac Pro, the 2018 Mac mini, the non-Retina 2015 MacBook Air that Apple sold some version of for over four years—buying them toward the end of their retail lifecycle means settling for years of fewer updates than you would have gotten if you had waited for the introduction of a new model. And that’s true even though Apple’s hardware support timelines are all calculated from the date of last availability rather than the date of introduction.
It just puts Mac buyers in a bad spot when Apple isn’t prompt with hardware updates, forcing people to either buy something that doesn’t fully suit their needs or settle for something older that will last for fewer years.
What should you do with an older Intel Mac?
The big question: If your Intel Mac is still functional but Apple is no longer supporting it, is there anything you can do to keep it both secure and functional?
All late-model Intel Macs officially support Windows 10, but that OS has its own end-of-support date looming in October 2025. Windows 11 can be installed, but only if you bypass its system requirements, which can work well, but it does require additional fiddling when it comes time to install major updates. Consumer-focused Linux distributions like Ubuntu, Mint, or Pop!_OS may work, depending on your hardware, but they come with a steep learning curve for non-technical users. Google’s ChromeOS Flex may also work, but ChromeOS is more functionally limited than most other operating systems.
The OpenCore Legacy Patcher provides one possible stay of execution for Mac owners who want to stay on macOS for as long as they can. But it faces two steep uphill climbs in macOS Tahoe. First, as Apple has removed more Intel Macs from the official support list, it has removed more of the underlying code from macOS that is needed to support those Macs and other Macs with similar hardware. This leaves more for the OpenCore Configurator team to have to patch in from older OSes, and this kind of forward-porting can leave hardware and software partly functional or non-functional.
Second, there’s the Apple T2 to consider. The Macs with a T2 treat it as a load-bearing co-processor, responsible for crucial operating system functions such as enabling Touch ID, serving as an SSD controller, encoding and decoding videos, communicating with the webcam and built-in microphone, and other operations. But Apple has never opened the T2 up to anyone, and it remains a bit of a black box for both the OpenCore/Hackintosh community and folks who would run Linux-based operating systems like Ubuntu or ChromeOS on that hardware.
The result is that the 2018 and 2019 MacBook Airs that didn’t support macOS 15 Sequoia last year never had support for them added to the OpenCore Legacy Patcher because the T2 chip simply won’t communicate with OpenCore firmware booted. Some T2 Macs don’t have this problem. But if yours does, it’s unlikely that anyone will be able to do anything about it, and your software support will end when Apple says it does.
Does any of this mean anything for Apple Silicon Mac support?
Late-model Intel MacBook Airs have fared worse than other Macs in terms of update longevity. Credit: Valentina Palladino
It will likely be at least two or three years before we know for sure how Apple plans to treat Apple Silicon Macs. Will the company primarily look at specs and technical capabilities, as it did from the late-’90s through to the mid-2010s? Or will Apple mainly stop supporting hardware based on its age, as it has done for more recent Macs and most current iPhones and iPads?
The three models to examine for this purpose are the first ones to shift to Apple Silicon: the M1 versions of the MacBook Air, Mac mini, and 13-inch MacBook Pro, all launched in late 2020. If these Macs are dropped in, say, 2027 or 2028’s big macOS release, but other, later M1 Macs like the iMac stay supported, it means Apple is likely sticking to a somewhat arbitrary age-based model, with certain Macs cut off from software updates that they are perfectly capable of running.
But it’s our hope that all Apple Silicon Macs have a long life ahead of them. The M2, M3, and M4 have all improved on the M1’s performance and other capabilities, but the M1 Macs are much more capable than the Intel ones they supplanted, the M1 was used so widely in various Mac models for so long, and Mac owners can pay so much more for their devices than iPhone and iPad owners. We’d love to see macOS return to the longer-tail software support it provided in the late-’00s and mid-2010s, when models could expect to see seven or eight all-new macOS versions and another two years of security updates afterward.
All signs point to Apple using the launch date of any given piece of hardware as the determining factor for continued software support. But that isn’t how it has always been, nor is it how it always has to be.
Andrew is a Senior Technology Reporter at Ars Technica, with a focus on consumer tech including computer hardware and in-depth reviews of operating systems like Windows and macOS. Andrew lives in Philadelphia and co-hosts a weekly book podcast called Overdue.
The support list for macOS Tahoe still includes Intel Macs, but it has been whittled down to just four models, all released in 2019 or 2020. We speculated that this meant that the end was near for Intel Macs, and now we can confirm just how near it is: macOS Tahoe will be the last new macOS release to support any Intel Macs. All new releases starting with macOS 27 will require an Apple Silicon Mac.
Apple will provide additional security updates for Tahoe until fall 2028, two years after it is replaced with macOS 27. That’s a typical schedule for older macOS versions, which all get one year of major point updates that include security fixes and new features, followed by two years of security-only updates to keep them patched but without adding significant new features.
Apple is also planning changes to Rosetta 2, the Intel-to-Arm app translation technology created to ease the transition between the Intel and Apple Silicon eras. Rosetta will continue to work as a general-purpose app translation tool in both macOS 26 and macOS 27.
But after that, Rosetta will be pared back and will only be available to a limited subset of apps—specifically, older games that rely on Intel-specific libraries but are no longer being actively maintained by their developers. Devs who want their apps to continue running on macOS after that will need to transition to either Apple Silicon-native apps or universal apps that run on either architecture.
Working at the intersection of Apple’s newest hardware and Linux kernel development, for the benefit of a free distribution, was never going to be easy. But it’s been an especially hard couple of weeks for Hector Martin, project lead for Asahi Linux, capping off years of what he describes as burnout, user entitlement, and political battles within the Linux kernel community about Rust code.
In a post on his site, “Resigning as Asahi Linux project lead,” Martin summarizes his history with hardware hacking projects, including his time with the Wii homebrew scene (Team Twiizers/fail0verflow), which had its share of insistent users desperate to play pirated games. Martin shifted his focus, and when Apple unveiled its own silicon with the M1 series, Martin writes, “I realized that making it run Linux was my dream project.” This time, there was no jailbreaking and a relatively open, if tricky, platform.
Support and donations came quickly. The first two years saw rapid advancement of a platform built “from scratch, with zero vendor support or documentation.” Upstreaming code to the Linux kernel, across “practically every Linux subsystem,” was an “incredibly frustrating experience” (emphasis Martin’s).
Then came the users demanding to know when Thunderbolt, monitors over USB-C, M3/M4 support, and even CPU temperature checking would appear. Donations and pledges slowly decreased while demands increased. “It seemed the more things we accomplished, the less support we had,” Martin writes.
Martin cites personal complications, along with stalking and harassment, as slowing down work through 2024, while Vulkan drivers and an emulation stack still shipped. Simultaneously, issues with pushing Rust code into the Linux kernel were brewing. Rust was “the entire reason our GPU driver was able to succeed in the time it did,” Martin writes. Citing the Nova driver for Nvidia GPUs as an example, Martin writes that “More modern programming languages are better suited to writing drivers for more modern hardware with more complexity and novel challenges, unsurprisingly.”
One of the key differences between Apple’s Macs and the iPhone and iPad is that the Mac can still boot and run non-Apple operating systems. This is a feature that Apple specifically built for the Mac, one of many features meant to ease the transition from Intel’s chips to Apple’s own silicon.
The problem, at least at first, was that alternate operating systems like Windows and Linux didn’t work natively with Apple’s hardware, not least because of missing drivers for basic things like USB ports, GPUs, and power management. Enter the Asahi Linux project, a community-driven effort to make open-source software run on Apple’s hardware.
In just a few years, the team has taken Linux on Apple Silicon from “basically bootable” to “plays native Windows games and sounds great doing it.” And the team’s ultimate goal is to contribute enough code upstream that you no longer need a Linux distribution just for Apple Silicon Macs.
On December 4 at 3: 30 pm Eastern (1: 30 pm Pacific), Ars Technica Senior Technology Reporter Andrew Cunningham will host a livestreamed YouTube conversation with Asahi Linux Project Lead Hector Martin and Graphics Lead Alyssa Rosenzweig that will cover the project’s genesis and its progress, as well as what the future holds.
Not a surprising generational update, but a lot of progress for just one year.
The new M4 Pro and M4 Max MacBook Pros. Credit: Andrew Cunningham
The new M4 Pro and M4 Max MacBook Pros. Credit: Andrew Cunningham
In some ways, my review of the new MacBook Pros will be a lot like my review of the new iMac. This is the third year and fourth generation of the Apple Silicon-era MacBook Pro design, and outwardly, few things have changed about the new M4, M4 Pro, and M4 Max laptops.
Here are the things that are different. Boosted RAM capacities, across the entire lineup but most crucially in the entry-level $1,599 M4 MacBook Pro, make the new laptops a shade cheaper and more versatile than they used to be. The new nano-texture display option, a $150 upgrade on all models, is a lovely matte-textured coating that completely eliminates reflections. There’s a third Thunderbolt port on the baseline M4 model (the M3 model had two), and it can drive up to three displays simultaneously (two external, plus the built-in screen). There’s a new webcam. It looks a little nicer and has a wide-angle lens that can show what’s on your desk instead of your face if you want it to. And there are new chips, which we’ll get to.
That is essentially the end of the list. If you are still using an Intel-era MacBook Pro, I’ll point you to our previous reviews, which mostly celebrate the improvements (more and different kids of ports, larger screens) while picking one or two nits (they are a bit larger and heavier than late-Intel MacBook Pros, and the display notch is an eyesore).
New chips: M4 and M4 Pro
That leaves us with the M4, M4 Pro, and M4 Max.
We’ve already talked a bunch about the M4 and M4 Pro in our reviews of the new iMac and the new Mac minis, but to recap, the M4 is a solid generational upgrade over the M3, thanks to its two extra efficiency cores on the CPU side. Comparatively, the M4 Pro is a much larger leap over the M3 Pro, mostly because the M3 Pro was such a mild update compared to the M2 Pro.
The M4’s single-core performance is between 14 and 21 percent faster than the M3s in our tests, and tests that use all the CPU cores are usually 20 or 30 percent faster. The GPU is occasionally as much as 33 percent faster than the M3 in our tests, though more often, the improvements are in the single or low double digits.
For the M4 Pro—bearing in mind that we tested the fully enabled version with 14 CPU cores and 20 GPU cores, and not the slightly cut down version sold in less expensive machines—single-core CPU performance is up by around 20-ish percent in our tests, in line with the regular M4’s performance advantage over the regular M3. The huge boost to CPU core count increases multicore performance by between 50 and 60 percent most of the time, a substantial boost that actually allows the M4 Pro to approach the CPU performance of the 2022 M1 Ultra. GPU performance is up by around 33 percent compared to M3 Pro, thanks to the additional GPU cores and memory bandwidth, but it’s still not as fast as any of Apple’s Max or Ultra chips, even the M1-series.
M4 Max
And finally, there’s the M4 Max (again, the fully enabled version, this one with 12 P-cores, 4 E-cores, 40 GPU cores, and 546GB/s of memory bandwidth). Single-core CPU performance is the biggest leap forward, jumping by between 18 and 28 percent in single-threaded benchmarks. Multi-core performance is generally up by between 15 and 20 percent. That’s a more-than-respectable generational leap, but it’s nowhere near what happened for the M4 Pro since both M3 Mac and M4 Max have the same CPU core counts.
The only weird thing we noticed in our testing was an inconsistent performance in our Handbrake video encoding test. Every time we ran it, it reliably took either five minutes and 20 seconds or four minutes and 30 seconds. For the slower result, power usage was also slightly reduced, which suggests to me that some kind of throttling is happening during this workload; we saw roughly these two results over and over across a dozen or so runs, each separated by at least five minutes to allow the Mac to cool back down. High Power mode didn’t make a difference in either direction.
CPU P/E-cores
GPU cores
RAM options
Display support (including internal)
Memory bandwidth
Apple M4 Max (low)
10/4
32
36GB
Up to five
410GB/s
Apple M4 Max (high)
12/4
40
48/64/128GB
Up to five
546GB/s
Apple M3 Max (high)
12/4
40
48/64/128GB
Up to five
409.6GB/s
Apple M2 Max (high)
8/4
38
64/96GB
Up to five
409.6GB/s
We shared our data with Apple and haven’t received a response. Note that we tested the M4 Max in the 16-inch MacBook Pro, and we’d expect any kind of throttling behavior to be slightly more noticeable in the 14-inch Pro since it has less room for cooling hardware.
The faster result is more in line with the rest of our multi-core tests for the M4 Max. Even the slower of the two results is faster than the M3 Max, albeit not by much. We also didn’t notice similar behavior for any of the other multi-core tests we ran. It’s worth keeping in mind if you plan to use the MacBook Pro for CPU-heavy, sustained workloads that will run for more than a few minutes at a time.
GPU performance in our tests varies widely compared to the M4 Max, with results ranging from as little as 10 or 15 percent (for 4K and 1440p GFXBench tests—the bigger boost to the 1080p version is coming partially from CPU improvements) to as high as 30 percent for the Cinebench 2024 GPU test. I suspect the benefits will vary depending on how much the apps you’re running benefit from the M4 Max’s improved memory bandwidth.
Power efficiency in the M4 Max isn’t dramatically different from the M3 Max—it’s more efficient by virtue of using roughly the same amount of power as the M3 Max and running a little faster, consuming less energy overall to do the same amount of work.
Credit: Andrew Cunningham
Finally, in a test of High Power mode, we did see some very small differences in the GFXBench scores, though not in other GPU-based tests like Cinebench and Blender or in any CPU-based tests. You might notice slightly better performance in games if you’re running them, but as with the M4 Pro, it doesn’t seem hugely beneficial. This is different from how it’s handled in many Windows PCs, including Snapdragon X Elite PCs with Arm-based chips in them because they do have substantially different performance in high-performance mode relative to the default “balanced” mode.
Nice to see you, yearly upgrade
The 14-inch and 16-inch MacBook Pros. The nano-texture glass displays eliminate all of the normal glossy-screen reflections and glare. Credit: Andrew Cunningham
The new MacBook Pros are all solid year-over-year upgrades, though they’ll be most interesting to people who bought their last MacBook Pro toward the end of the Intel era sometime in 2019 or 2020. The nano-texture display, extra speed, and extra RAM may be worth a look for owners of the M1 MacBook Pros if you truly need the best performance you can get in a laptop. But I’d still draw a pretty bright line between latter-day Intel Macs (aging, hot, getting toward the end of the line for macOS updates, not getting all the features of current macOS versions anyway) and any kind of Apple Silicon Mac (fully supported with all features, still-current designs, barely three years old at most).
Frankly, the computer that benefits the most is probably the $1,599 entry-level MacBook Pro, which, thanks to the 16GB RAM upgrade and improved multi-monitor support, is a fairly capable professional computer. Of all the places where Apple’s previous 8GB RAM floor felt inappropriate, it was in the M3 MacBook Pro. With the extra ports, high-refresh-rate screen, and nano-texture coating option, it’s a bit easier to articulate the kind of user who that laptop is actually for, separating it a bit from the 15-inch MacBook Air.
The M4 Pro version also deserves a shout-out for its particularly big performance jump compared to the M2 Pro and M3 Pro generations. It’s a little odd to have a MacBook Pro generation where the middle chip is the most impressive of the three, and that’s not to discount how fast the M4 Max is—it’s just the reality of the situation given Apple’s focus on efficiency rather than performance for the M3 Pro.
The good
RAM upgrades across the whole lineup. This particularly benefits the $1,599 M4 MacBook Air, which jumps from 8GB to 16GB
M4 and M4 Max are both respectable generational upgrades and offer substantial performance boosts from Intel or even M1 Macs
M4 Pro is a huge generational leap, as Apple’s M3 Pro used a more conservative design
Nano-texture display coating is very nice and not too expensive relative to the price of the laptops
Better multi-monitor support for M4 version
Other design things—ports, 120 Hz screen, keyboard, and trackpad—are all mostly the same as before and are all very nice
The bad
Occasional evidence of M4 Max performance throttling, though it’s inconsistent, and we only saw it in one of our benchmarks
Need to jump all the way to M4 Max to get the best GPU performance
The ugly
Expensive, especially once you start considering RAM and storage upgrades
Andrew is a Senior Technology Reporter at Ars Technica, with a focus on consumer tech including computer hardware and in-depth reviews of operating systems like Windows and macOS. Andrew lives in Philadelphia and co-hosts a weekly book podcast called Overdue.
The M4 Max is also the only chip where memory bandwidth and RAM support changes between the low- and high-end versions. The low-end M4 Max offers 410GB/s of memory bandwidth, while the fully enabled M4 Max offers 546GB/s.
For completeness’ sake, there is a third version of the M4 that Apple ships, with nine CPU cores, 10 GPU cores, and 8GB of RAM. But the company is only shipping that version of the chip in M4 iPad Pros with 256GB or 512GB of storage, so we haven’t included it in the tables here.
Compared to the M2 and M3
CPU P/E-cores
GPU cores
RAM options
Display support (including internal)
Memory bandwidth
Apple M4 (low)
4/4
8
16/24GB
Up to two
120GB/s
Apple M4 (high)
4/6
10
16/24/32GB
Up to three
120GB/s
Apple M3 (high)
4/4
16
8/16/24GB
Up to two
102.4GB/s
Apple M2 (high)
4/4
10
8/16/24GB
Up to two
102.4GB/s
One interesting thing about the M4: This is the first time that the low-end Apple Silicon CPU has increased its maximum core count. The M1, M2, and M3 all used a 4+4 split that divided evenly between performance and efficiency cores, but the M4 can include six efficiency cores instead.
That’s not a game-changing development performance-wise (the “E” in “E-core” does not stand for “exciting”), but we’ve seen over and over again in chips from Apple, Intel, and others that adding more efficiency cores does meaningfully improve CPU performance in heavily multithreaded tasks.
CPU P/E-cores
GPU cores
RAM options
Display support (including internal)
Memory bandwidth
Apple M4 Pro (low)
8/4
16
24/48/64GB
Up to three
273GB/s
Apple M4 Pro (high)
10/4
20
24/48/64GB
Up to three
273GB/s
Apple M3 Pro (high)
6/6
18
18/36GB
Up to three
153.6GB/s
Apple M2 Pro (high)
8/4
19
16/32GB
Up to three
204.8GB/s
The M4 Pro is the most interesting year-over-year upgrade, though this says more about the M3 Pro than anything else. As we noted last year, it was a bit of an outlier, the only one of the M3-generation chips with fewer transistors than its predecessor. A small decrease in GPU cores and a large decrease in high-performance CPU cores explains most of the difference. The result was a very power-efficient chip, but also one that was more of a sidestep from the M2 Pro than a real upgrade.
Apple’s week of Mac announcements continues today, and as expected, we’re getting a substantial new update to the Mac mini. Apple’s least-expensive Mac, the mini, is being updated with new M4 processors, plus a smaller design that looks like a cross between an Apple TV box and a Mac Studio—this is the mini’s first major design change since the original aluminum version was released in 2010. The mini is also Apple’s first device to ship with the M4 Pro processor, a beefed-up version of the M4 with more CPU and GPU cores, and it’s also the Mac mini’s first update since the M2 models came out in early 2023.
The cheapest Mac mini will still run you $599, which includes 16GB of RAM and 256GB of storage; as with yesterday’s iMac update, this is the first time since 2012 that Apple has boosted the amount of RAM in an entry-level Mac. It’s a welcome upgrade for every new Mac in the lineup that’s getting it, but the $200 that Apple previously charged for the 16GB upgrade makes an even bigger difference to someone shopping for a $599 system than it does for someone who can afford a $999 or $1,299 computer.
The M4 Pro Mac mini starts at $1,399, a $100 increase from the M2 Pro version. Both models go up for preorder today and will begin arriving on November 8.
A brand-new design for a little box
The new Mac mini is larger than the Apple TV by a bit—5×5 inches instead of 3.66×3.66 inches—but its proportions are roughly similar. That makes its footprint significantly smaller than the old mini (and the current Studio), which was 7.75×7.75 inches. But it’s also a fair bit taller: 2 inches, up from 1.4 inches.
Like the Studio, it’s made primarily of aluminum and has a pair of 10 Gbps USB-C ports on the front, plus an indicator light and a headphone jack for connecting headphones or speakers. On the back, it sheds all of its remaining USB-A ports in favor of Thunderbolt/USB-C ports (note that, like some Mac Studio models, the ports on the back have Thunderbolt capabilities and the ones on the front don’t). Compared to the old M2 mini, this is a net gain of one rear Thunderbolt port, but you’re giving one up compared to the M2 Pro Mac mini—the extra ports on the front should make up for this, but it’s worth noting if you have something connected to every single Thunderbolt port on your current box. All Mac mini models still include a gigabit Ethernet port and a full-size HDMI port, so USB-A is the only port you’ll need a dongle for that you didn’t need one for before.
Reliable rumors have suggested that M4 Macs are right around the corner, and now Bloomberg’s Mark Gurman is forecasting a specific launch date: November 1, following a late-October announcement that mirrors last year’s Halloween-themed reveal for the first M3 Macs.
This date could be subject to change, and not all the products announced in October would necessarily launch on November 1—lower-end Macs are more likely to launch early, and higher-end models would be more likely to ship a bit later in the month.
The list of what to expect is the same as it has been for a while: refreshed 14- and 16-inch MacBook Pros with M4, M4 Pro, and M4 Max chips, a new M4 version of the 24-inch iMac, and an M4 update to the Mac mini that leapfrogs the M3 entirely. These will all be the first Macs to get the M4, following its unexpected introduction in the iPad Pro earlier this year.
The refreshed Mac mini is the most interesting of the new models—it’s said to come with a fully revamped design for the first time since the aluminum unibody version was released in 2010. The new Mac mini is said to be closer in size to an Apple TV box, but it will retain an internal power supply that doesn’t require a bulky external brick. The Mac mini lineup should still be split between two slightly different machines: one entry-level model with a basic M4 chip, and a higher-end M4 Pro version that bridges the gap between the Mac mini and the Mac Studio.
Enlarge/ Apple’s M3 Max-powered 16-inch MacBook Pro. New Pro laptops and some desktops could be on tap for later this fall.
Andrew Cunningham
Apple’s newest iPhones and Apple Watches don’t come out until later this week, but the rumor mill is already indicating that Apple is planning a product announcement for October to refresh some of the products that didn’t get a mention at the iPhone event. Apple scheduled its release calendar similarly last year, when it announced and released new iPhones in September and then launched the first wave of M3 Macs around Halloween.
Bloomberg’s Mark Gurman believes that the event will mainly focus on the first wave of Macs with M4 processors, following the standard M4’s introduction in the iPad Pro earlier this year. As he has reported previously, he expects new MacBook Pro models with the M4 and “pro-level M4 chip options,” presumably the M4 Pro and M4 Max. He also expects an M4 version of the 24-inch iMac.
But the most interesting of the new Macs will still be the redesigned Mac mini, which hasn’t gotten an M3 update at all and has been using the same basic external design since 2010. This Mac mini is said to be closer in size to the Apple TV than the current mini, but still uses an internal power supply so that owners won’t have to wrangle a power brick. At least some of the current device’s ports will be replaced by USB-C and/or Thunderbolt ports, something that MacRumors apparently confirmed earlier today when they found a reference to an “Apple silicon Mac mini (5 ports)” in an Apple software update (some of those ports are reportedly on the front of the device, a nice Mac Studio design upgrade that I’d like to see on a new Mac mini).
The “five port” descriptor does imply that there will be another model with either more or fewer ports—Apple used similar terminology to distinguish the two- and four-port versions of some MacBook Pro models in the Intel days. The current M2 Mac mini models have fewer ports than the models with the M2 Pro chip, because the more powerful processor also has more I/O capabilities—assuming we get one Mac mini with an M4 and an upgraded model with an M4 Pro, we’d expect the Pro version to have more ports.
Gurman says that other Mac models, including the Mac Studio, Mac Pro, and MacBook Air, will see M4-series updates throughout 2025. Of those, the Mac Studio and the Mac Pro have gone the longest without an update—they’re all still using M2-series chips.
Apple is also said to be planning some new lower-end iPads for the October event—not the first time that Macs and iPads have shared billing for one of these late-fall product announcements. The $349 iPad 10 and the iPad mini have both gone over a year without any kind of hardware update; it seems likely that they’ll both get newer chips, if not significantly updated designs.
The macOS 15 Sequoia update will inevitably be known as “the AI one” in retrospect, introducing, as it does, the first wave of “Apple Intelligence” features.
That’s funny because none of that stuff is actually ready for the 15.0 release that’s coming out today. A lot of it is coming “later this fall” in the 15.1 update, which Apple has been testing entirely separately from the 15.0 betas for weeks now. Some of it won’t be ready until after that—rumors say image generation won’t be ready until the end of the year—but in any case, none of it is ready for public consumption yet.
But the AI-free 15.0 release does give us a chance to evaluate all of the non-AI additions to macOS this year. Apple Intelligence is sucking up a lot of the media oxygen, but in most other ways, this is a typical 2020s-era macOS release, with one or two headliners, several quality-of-life tweaks, and some sparsely documented under-the-hood stuff that will subtly change how you experience the operating system.
The AI-free version of the operating system is also the one that all users of the remaining Intel Macs will be using, since all of the Apple Intelligence features require Apple Silicon. Most of the Intel Macs that ran last year’s Sonoma release will run Sequoia this year—the first time this has happened since 2019—but the difference between the same macOS version running on different CPUs will be wider than it has been. It’s a clear indicator that the Intel Mac era is drawing to a close, even if support hasn’t totally ended just yet.
