The highest spec new MacBook Pro costs over $6,000

midian182

Posts: 7,276   +65
Staff member
In brief: Apple lifted the lid on its long-rumored MacBook Pros on Monday, confirming the powerful M1 Pro and M1 Max SoCs. What we’ve seen so far looks very enticing, but how much would someone pay if they wanted the absolute top-spec option? An eye-watering $6,099.

Apple has rightly never been known as a budget-friendly company. Its new MacBook Pros start at $1,999 for the 14-inch version and $2,499 for the 16-inch model. But buyers can spec them to a price much higher.

Getting the most expensive option requires picking the 16-inch MacBook Pro with the M1 Max chip, which offers the same 10 core CPU as the M1 Pro SoC but ups the GPU core count from 16 cores to 32. By increasing the unified memory from 32GB to 64GB and moving from a standard 1TB of SSD storage to 8TB, that price becomes a dollar shy of $6,100. Add in Final Cut Pro and Logic Pro, and you’ll be paying $6,598.

The top-specced 14-inch MacBook Pro with the M1 Max, meanwhile, reaches $5,899—without the extra software.

This isn’t new territory for Apple. The Intel-powered 16-inch MacBook Pro from 2019 also cost $6,099 for a maxed-out configuration at launch, and the Mac Pro unveiled during the same year reached $45,000, or over $50,000 with the Pro monitor and stand.

The new MacBook Pros do look like compelling buys for Apple fans and professionals. They offer higher resolution Retina XDR displays, more ports, a row of Function keys instead of a Touch Bar, and screens with 120Hz refresh rates—though the notch isn’t to everyone’s taste.

In addition to revealing all the new features in the redesigned MacBook Pros, Apple showed off its latest in-house SoCs: the M1 Pro and M1 Max. They offer a slew of improvements over their M1 predecessor, which itself has won countless praise for its combination of power and performance.

Permalink to story.

 

Dimitriid

Posts: 1,311   +2,557
Another part that I realized later during the day yesterday is the dishonest keynote presentation: they talked up the M1 Pro chip a lot and kept talking 10 cpu cores and 16 gpu cores but the 2000 M1 Pro macbook chip is actually only 8 cpu 14 gpu cores so to actually get the M1 Pro that lives up to their claims it's gotta be the 2500 model and for that money you might as well get the 16 inch model instead which has the same CPU, a bigger screen and a bigger battery.

So really the most "cost effective" macbook pro is the entry level 16" model. If you want a smaller version well it's honestly not a whole lot better than the M1 non-pro pro one, the first gen M1 macbook pro one. (Also damned if naming the chip "Pro" wasn't a stupid move, of all the monickers they could have used they went for the one that's guaranteed to create the most confusion: You can have a macbook, a macbook pro, a macbook pro pro and a macbook pro max)

And if you're paying 3000 then you're basically paying enough that you might as well build yourself a workstation desktop: you know they held back on announcing desktop imac pros just so people would get impatient and put down money for the 4000, 5000 and 6000 configuration of this new macbook pros.
 

Toju Mikie

Posts: 239   +215
Ouch

Probably, it won't be easy to repair.
They advertise these laptops for being able to do heavy duty work, but I'm worried about the expected fragility of the product.

I'll wait for the reviews and teardown to make further judgment.
 

yRaz

Posts: 3,892   +4,136
$6000 for something that can't even run x86 applications natively.

Look, I get it, some people want to run OSX or whatever Apple is calling their OS these day. Those people are wrong, but that's their problem. Either way, the premium that Apple charges for "high end" hardware is just absurd. The build quality of their devices is high, they always use high quality displays, but FFS, the amount of money they charge for ram and storage upgrades is just absurd.
 

Irata

Posts: 1,808   +3,042
It is the price of my desktop PC, which is more powerful and productive. Apple is just so greedy. Never buying anything from them.
If you compare standard spec MacBook Pro to e.g. a Microsoft Surface (Book) things look quite different.

Tbh, unless I absolutely had to have Windows for whatever reason, I‘d be hard pressed to get a Surface Book with it‘s comparably piddly quad core CPU and poor graphics over a MacBook pro.

That is if this was the form factor I‘d be looking for, a Surface Book does not even appear to be in the same class as a MacBook Pro.
 

Xex360

Posts: 162   +238
Using an Apple product at this point, is like a sign saying you are a sucker.
I had to use one at work, fortunately I could "fix" it by installing windows with all its faults was way better and ironically more stable (both were clean installs).
 

Squid Surprise

Posts: 4,432   +3,759
It is the price of my desktop PC, which is more powerful and productive. Apple is just so greedy. Never buying anything from them.
Yeah... but is your PC as "shiny" as a MacBook?

Seriously though, you always pay a premium for any laptop - let alone anything from Apple...

To compare your desktop to an Apple Laptop isn't really fair...

Oh... and about 1/3 the price of the maxed out Macbook is the 8TB SSD...
 

yRaz

Posts: 3,892   +4,136
Yeah... but is your PC as "shiny" as a MacBook?

Seriously though, you always pay a premium for any laptop - let alone anything from Apple...

To compare your desktop to an Apple Laptop isn't really fair...

Oh... and about 1/3 the price of the maxed out Macbook is the 8TB SSD...
you pay a premium for a laptop because engineers have to cram all that crap into something small enough that consumers are willing to pay for as a "laptop"

for Apple, you're paying for a fashion item that isn't even as good as the "premium" you'd pay for another laptop.
 

Squid Surprise

Posts: 4,432   +3,759
you pay a premium for a laptop because engineers have to cram all that crap into something small enough that consumers are willing to pay for as a "laptop"

for Apple, you're paying for a fashion item that isn't even as good as the "premium" you'd pay for another laptop.
Well, if you are a graphic designer who needs/wants to work on the go... the MacBook is actually a pretty decent deal.

Assuming you don't need 8TB of internal storage, the MacBook is about the same price as a Surface Book - and outperforms it quite handily.

Saying that - you need to be a "Mac person" to want one of these... and if you are a "Mac person", you really don't have any other options...
 

yRaz

Posts: 3,892   +4,136
Well, if you are a graphic designer who needs/wants to work on the go... the MacBook is actually a pretty decent deal.

Assuming you don't need 8TB of internal storage, the MacBook is about the same price as a Surface Book - and outperforms it quite handily.

Saying that - you need to be a "Mac person" to want one of these... and if you are a "Mac person", you really don't have any other options...
There are plenty of options that are better than cited MacPro for 1/3 the cost. Unless you need software that runs specifically on OSX then there is absolutely no reason to buy a mac. I say this as someone who installed linux on my laptop so don't think I'm an MS shill, either.
 

Squid Surprise

Posts: 4,432   +3,759
There are plenty of options that are better than cited MacPro for 1/3 the cost. Unless you need software that runs specifically on OSX then there is absolutely no reason to buy a mac. I say this as someone who installed linux on my laptop so don't think I'm an MS shill, either.
That's why I said you need to be a "Mac person" obviously... and obviously, the MacBook DOES have exclusive software (and the OS) that only run on them... Macs don't really have competition - if you are in the Mac ecosystem, you get one. If not... you don't...
 

VitalyT

Posts: 6,026   +6,385
Try $8,542, because that's what they sell for in Europe's price equivalent (€7,338.98)

price.png
 

JohnSmithESP

Posts: 72   +47
Another part that I realized later during the day yesterday is the dishonest keynote presentation: they talked up the M1 Pro chip a lot and kept talking 10 cpu cores and 16 gpu cores but the 2000 M1 Pro macbook chip is actually only 8 cpu 14 gpu cores so to actually get the M1 Pro that lives up to their claims it's gotta be the 2500 model and for that money you might as well get the 16 inch model instead which has the same CPU, a bigger screen and a bigger battery.

So really the most "cost effective" macbook pro is the entry level 16" model. If you want a smaller version well it's honestly not a whole lot better than the M1 non-pro pro one, the first gen M1 macbook pro one. (Also damned if naming the chip "Pro" wasn't a stupid move, of all the monickers they could have used they went for the one that's guaranteed to create the most confusion: You can have a macbook, a macbook pro, a macbook pro pro and a macbook pro max)

And if you're paying 3000 then you're basically paying enough that you might as well build yourself a workstation desktop: you know they held back on announcing desktop imac pros just so people would get impatient and put down money for the 4000, 5000 and 6000 configuration of this new macbook pros.
McFlurry Pro MAX Ti
 

VitalyT

Posts: 6,026   +6,385
Comes with the revolutionary, HDMI 2.0. (Not HDMI 2.1)

I mean, are f-g sh-ing us? This is as pathetic as it gets.
 

BVB2000

Posts: 8   +2
1. We don't have any benchmarks for the new M1 Max yet. Also: You are comparing a laptop with a desktop here.

However, it will be hard to beat the CPU performance of the top Macbook unless you have some crazy Xeon setup. GPU performance should be great but probably not quite mobile 3080 level. Performance for video rendering and machine learning will be through the roof thanks to the integrated encoders and stuff - there is no way your PC will be able to keep up. So "my PC is more powerful and productive" is rather silly to say - it just depends on how you look at it.

2. This is clickbait article and all tech pages play this silly game every time. In reality, you can get the new 16-inch Macbook Pro for $2.5k which is the same as the previous model. Speccing it with a giant 8TB SSD and 64GB of unified memory is ...not exactly what any normal users (even "pro's") would do.


It is the price of my desktop PC, which is more powerful and productive. Apple is just so greedy. Never buying anything from them.
 

Mr Majestyk

Posts: 928   +821
Pro grade and costs $6000 yet who would use one that can't run CUDA or OpenCL. GPU is useless. I'll take with a quadro GPU in it thanks if I actually need to do serious work.
 

Squid Surprise

Posts: 4,432   +3,759
Pro grade and costs $6000 yet who would use one that can't run CUDA or OpenCL. GPU is useless. I'll take with a quadro GPU in it thanks if I actually need to do serious work.
Why would you want to do that on a Mac? You can use Metal API just fine... and ask all of the professional graphic designers who have been using Macbooks for years if this is a problem... they'll tell you "no"...

And, once again, this is NOT a $6,000 laptop. That's the max config including an 8TB SSD...
 

DCOCA

Posts: 10   +6
There are plenty of options that are better than cited MacPro for 1/3 the cost. Unless you need software that runs specifically on OSX then there is absolutely no reason to buy a mac. I say this as someone who installed linux on my laptop so don't think I'm an MS shill, either.

I took bachelor of design, MacBook Pro are a requirement for the program. I used to be a windows guy, I even worked at BlackBerry with Microsoft servers and Microsoft exchange for over 6 years before I went back to school in design. I hated the idea of using an Apple device, now I wouldn’t touch windows; Apple has a better experience,