An M1X would meet my CPU and GPU requirements right now. Of course when CPU horsepower increases, sometimes there are new things to do to use up that horsepower. But I don't see that in the near term. I'm not the customer for the Mac Pro or the Apple Silicon Mac Pro. I would like more RAM but I wouldn't say that I require it. I can use two M1X minis together if I need more compute and RAM. I am curious as to what Apple will do though. I don't think that they had this figured out a year ago and do think that they are figuring it out and experimenting with it now.

For me I am the opposite.  I am a long time windows sysadmin who just picked up a MBA M1.  And I am finding that it is perfect for my needs. 

What I need to fast performance with actual, usable all day battery life on the go.  I mean it.  I am using this thing 10 hours a day and I do not want to pack or carry a charger. 

I have a Big Dell Precision Laptop in my car with the accompanying huge power brick if I actually need something in Windows, but in the entire 3 weeks I have had the MBA, I have needed it exactly once.

I could have gone Surface Pro, but honestly, Windows laptops all start to feel sluggish after a year or so.  And I have found that the surface pro just gives me 6 1/2 hours of battery life in my use case.

Quote from: Robert on March 20, 2021, 02:03:06
So why did you buy a MacOS in the first place if a Mac is almost useless to you? #FacePam

Perhaps he liked the design. There are many people who need Windows. They might like Mac OS, they might dislike (or even hate) Windows, it changes nothing. The reality is that a lot of software doesn't exist for Mac OS. Transition to Intel and Bootcamp allowed these people to buy Mac despite this. There is another group that, for a change, needs Mac OS. Either they need both systems or perhaps they like Windows. Perhaps they like to game. And this allows them to have both in one computer. An example would be developers for iOS or web designers needing to check the look in Safari.

Quote from: Lee Rutter on March 19, 2021, 18:09:45
The more CORE I can get, the better. I run VM's and currently I assign 2 Cores per VM and would like to assign more for better performance with Windows 10. Having 12 Core and 32gb or 64gb will actually provide me with the system I need, along with multiple USB ports. I would also like to assign 12gb memory for each VM, hence the need for 32gb or 64gb memory.

How do you run Win10 on an ARM processor? And don't forget that the high efficiency cores are a lot slower. In this scenario, I wouldn't count them. Just get yourself a 5900X. It's going to be cheaper and faster. And you can have as much cheap RAM as you want.

"90% of my daily computer needs can't be done in MacOS (or Windows ARM) so that's gone now"

So why did you buy a MacOS in the first place if a Mac is almost useless to you? #FacePam

Dongles are dead on arrival for MBP - nice to hear that all ports are coming back +  Magsafe. Now it is all about GPU. 2 x the performance of M1 is a minimum. eGPU support maybe?

The big advantage for Apple from Intel Macs was that users could always run Windows on their machines. Apple ARM can't do that (well) and it boldly snatches defeat from the jaws of that victory because Apple's paltry MacOS market share just isn't large enough to make Apple ARM viable for the real world beyond the small fringe of specialized users (about 10% of computer users at last count.)

I've been a MBP/Mac Mini user for the better part of a decade precisely because I could use Windows on those machines. 90% of my daily computer needs can't be done in MacOS (or Windows ARM) so that's gone now. Great job, Apple!

I bought the Developer Test Kit and was wowed with the performance and it doesn't include the latest M1 processor.

For me, I am looking forward to the new releases, as most everyone else looking to buy a Mac this year or the next. The current M1 Macs are limited to 16gb Memory and that really bites.

The more CORE I can get, the better. I run VM's and currently I assign 2 Cores per VM and would like to assign more for better performance with Windows 10. Having 12 Core and 32gb or 64gb will actually provide me with the system I need, along with multiple USB ports. I would also like to assign 12gb memory for each VM, hence the need for 32gb or 64gb memory.

Hoping that all of this will be a reality this year.

Quote from: JohnIL on March 19, 2021, 13:30:06
I think Apple will have a hard time selling any Pro model priced at what they have typically wanted for a Pro Mac. I mean the performance so far of the M1 makes spending a lot more a lot less attractive even if the M1X has even more performance. Mainly because adding more cores doesn't always mean a huge performance gain. This already has been a issue for Apple trying to sell a 13 inch Macbook Pro when the Macbook Air is almost as good for less. Could Apple have overplayed its hand with the M1? I have to wonder if the Pro lineup will shrink significantly with Mac's?

I don't think M1 changed much at all. The real advance is that you can get MBP13 level of performance with passive cooling. That's big. The problem for MBP13 is that it's not much faster than MBA. And some people find the shape of MBA more comfortable. But in absolute terms, performance of M1 is nothing to write home about. Even my significantly cheaper web browsing computer will obliterate M1 in multithreaded CPU workloads. If you're the kind of person who has a $2k+ CPU or GPU, you're not suddenly going to switch over to M1. M1 does a great job compared to 4 core ULV processors. But that's about where it ends. And just as 4C ULV processors are enough for a lot of people, M1 is enough for a lot of people. I'm intentionally leaving the question of iGPU out of this as Intel has waken up to the idea that something more powerful might be good. And I'm not familiar with the numbers.

So, the big question is what exactly you do. There was always a question of what a "Pro" Mac is good for. Apple has a pretty narrow focus. I would say most of the professional landscape (that requires powerful hardware) is pretty much excluded as the software is missing.

Assuming that CPU scaling is 80% Efficient (very conservative, more likely to be more than 90) and GPU at 90% these figures come out
A 12 Core M series with 4-8-8 configuration would score a Geekbench score of SC: 1709 MC: 11387 Metal:11:387 Cinebench SC:1498 MC10:800
A 12 Core M series with 4-8-16 configuration would score the same, with metal at 79.128
A 12 Core M series with 4-12-16 configuration would score a Geekbench score of SC:1709 MC:16856 metal at 79.128 Cinebench SC:1498 MC15.594

Performance aside. For me the most important thing the MacBook Pro needs to have is more connectors including older USB-A and other things that people need every day. Also MagSafe since a common reason for laptop degradation over time is the wearing out of the connection plug.

After that the 14" model needs to have more than 16GB RAM, it's not 2013 anymore. We can't be using 2013 specs almost 10 years later.

I think Apple will have a hard time selling any Pro model priced at what they have typically wanted for a Pro Mac. I mean the performance so far of the M1 makes spending a lot more a lot less attractive even if the M1X has even more performance. Mainly because adding more cores doesn't always mean a huge performance gain. This already has been a issue for Apple trying to sell a 13 inch Macbook Pro when the Macbook Air is almost as good for less. Could Apple have overplayed its hand with the M1? I have to wonder if the Pro lineup will shrink significantly with Mac's?