Apple Introduces M2 Ultra

[TheLostSwede]

Apple today announced M2 Ultra, a new system on a chip (SoC) that delivers huge performance increases to the Mac and completes the M2 family. M2 Ultra is the largest and most capable chip Apple has ever created, and it makes the new Mac Studio and Mac Pro the most powerful Mac desktops ever made. M2 Ultra is built using a second-generation 5-nanometer process and uses Apple's groundbreaking UltraFusion technology to connect the die of two M2 Max chips, doubling the performance. M2 Ultra consists of 134 billion transistors—20 billion more than M1 Ultra. Its unified memory architecture supports up to a breakthrough 192 GB of memory capacity, which is 50 percent more than M1 Ultra, and features 800 GB/s of memory bandwidth—twice that of M2 Max. M2 Ultra features a more powerful CPU that's 20 percent faster than M1 Ultra, a larger GPU that's up to 30 percent faster, and a Neural Engine that's up to 40 percent faster. It also features a media engine with twice the capabilities of M2 Max for blazing ProRes acceleration. With all these advancements, M2 Ultra takes Mac performance to a whole new level yet again.

"M2 Ultra delivers astonishing performance and capabilities for our pro users' most demanding workflows, while maintaining Apple silicon's industry-leading power efficiency," said Johny Srouji, Apple's senior vice president of Hardware Technologies. "With huge performance gains in the CPU, GPU, and Neural Engine, combined with massive memory bandwidth in a single SoC, M2 Ultra is the world's most powerful chip ever created for a personal computer."




Industry-Leading UltraFusion Technology
M2 Ultra is built from two M2 Max dies connected through UltraFusion, Apple's industry-leading, custom-built packaging technology. UltraFusion uses a silicon interposer that connects the dies with more than 10,000 signals, providing over 2.5 TB/s of low-latency interprocessor bandwidth.

UltraFusion's architecture enables M2 Ultra to appear as a single chip to software. This means code doesn't need to be rewritten to utilize the extreme performance of M2 Ultra and makes UltraFusion unlike anything else in the industry.

Unparalleled Performance and Power Efficiency
The 24-core CPU of M2 Ultra consists of 16 next-generation high-performance cores and eight next-generation high-efficiency cores, delivering up to 20 percent faster performance than M1 Ultra. With Mac Studio powered by M2 Ultra, colorists using DaVinci Resolve will experience up to 50 percent faster video processing compared to Mac Studio with M1 Ultra.

The GPU can be configured with 60 or 76 next-generation cores. This is up to 12 more cores and up to a 30 percent improvement compared to the incredibly powerful GPU of M1 Ultra. Rendering 3D effects using Octane on Mac Studio with M2 Ultra is up to 3x faster than Mac Studio with M1 Ultra.

Game-Changing Unified Memory Architecture
Apple's unified memory architecture, a hallmark of Apple silicon, delivers incredible bandwidth, low latency, and unmatched power efficiency. M2 Ultra features 800 GB/s of system memory bandwidth, far greater than anything found in a PC. And it can be configured with a massive 192 GB of unified memory, which enables workflows not possible on a PC. For example, M2 Ultra can train massive machine learning workloads in a single system that the most powerful discrete GPU can't even process.

Advanced Custom Technologies Supercharge Machine Learning, Video, and More
M2 Ultra integrates Apple's latest custom technologies right on the chip, maximizing performance and efficiency:

• M2 Ultra features a 32-core Neural Engine, delivering 31.6 trillion operations per second, which is 40 percent faster performance than M1 Ultra.
• The powerful media engine has twice the capabilities of M2 Max, further accelerating video processing. It has dedicated, hardware-enabled H.264, HEVC, and ProRes encode and decode, allowing M2 Ultra to play back up to 22 streams of 8K ProRes 422 video—far more than any PC chip can do.
• The display engine supports up to six Pro Display XDRs, driving more than 100 million pixels.
• The latest Secure Enclave, along with hardware-verified secure boot and runtime anti-exploitation technologies, provides best-in-class security.

Better for the Environment
The power-efficient performance of M2 Ultra unlocks new possibilities for even the most demanding pro users without sacrificing environmental responsibility. Today, Apple is carbon neutral for global corporate operations, and by 2030, plans to have net-zero climate impact across the entire business, which includes manufacturing supply chains and all product life cycles. This also means that every chip Apple creates, from design to manufacturing, will be 100 percent carbon neutral.

Mac Transition to Apple Silicon Now Complete
With M2 Ultra powering the new Mac Pro, the Mac transition to Apple silicon is now complete, revolutionizing the laptop and desktop experience. Fueled by continued innovation in Apple silicon, it's the beginning of a new era for the Mac.

View at TechPowerUp Main Site | Source

 

[SundayOverclocker]

Would be nice to see a table comparing M2 Ultra to M1 Ultra and M2 Max. And also to one or two similar latest-gen Intel or AMD CPU.

 

[KellyNyanbinary]

In a Mac Studio? Sure.

In a Mac Pro? Ehhhhh not enough cores or memory for truly intensive CPU loads.

Professionals should wait for M3 Extreme or whatever Apple wants to call it.

 

[Aquinus]

In a Mac Studio? Sure.

In a Mac Pro? Ehhhhh not enough cores or memory for truly intensive CPU loads.

Professionals should wait for M3 Extreme or whatever Apple wants to call it.

Use cases/examples? If you need more than 24 cores and 192GB of ram, you should probably be using server hardware and you likely don't want to be in the room as all of that hardware.

 

[TheinsanegamerN]

Would be nice to see a table comparing M2 Ultra to M1 Ultra and M2 Max. And also to one or two similar latest-gen Intel or AMD CPU.

Comparing to anything outside the apple ecosystem is fraught with defects. Different OS, different compiler, different optimization. The same issues that have plagued software like geekbench for over a decade.

 

[chrcoluk]

I was thinking they made some new variant of the M.2 connector when I read headline.

 

[Steevo]

Moar cores?

 

[matar]

Microsoft start making chips like that we need this chip on windows.

 

[Denver]

Microsoft start making chips like that we need this chip on windows.

Lol What do AMD's high-end GPUs and CPUs lose in performance for this huge waste of silicon?

134B of transistors = 2 x 7950X + 2 x 7900XTX.

 

[zlobby]

Sounds suspiciously like 'MK Ultra'...

 

[goodeedidid]

In a Mac Studio? Sure.

In a Mac Pro? Ehhhhh not enough cores or memory for truly intensive CPU loads.

Professionals should wait for M3 Extreme or whatever Apple wants to call it.

I'm always amused when non-professionals know what professionals need and what to use.

 

[95Viper]

Stay on topic!

 

[Minus Infinity]

Would be nice to see a table comparing M2 Ultra to M1 Ultra and M2 Max. And also to one or two similar latest-gen Intel or AMD CPU.

M2 Pro

M2 Max

M2 Utra

 

[Mussels]

Apple slaps a laptop chip (or two) into a desktop size, adds last-gen PCI-E 4.0 and thunderbolt (probably got a bottleneck there somewhere) and demands you know it's faster than the old intel laptop hardware they sold, especially the ones that got slower every release because they couldnt cool them (three seperate links, there)

the system limits the maximum core clock speed to 1GHz. When this happens the mac feels very slow and janky and even the most basic things can take uncomfortably long.

I love picking apart apple marketing claims

At best, they had a 9th gen 8 core 'i9' that overheated so bad they went back to 4 core CPUs, outperforming them would be pretty easy

The notebookcheck review is *AWESOME* for showing what the macbooks did well vs what they did not

Apple MacBook Pro 16 2019 Laptop Review: A convincing Core i9-9880H and Radeon Pro 5500M powered multimedia laptop - NotebookCheck.net Reviews

What they did: Look pretty when off
What they didnt: Run well, run stock clocks, run cool.
On average it only manages about 85% of the performance of any other brand using the same CPU, and had known problems for stuttering under load

So when apple says they outperform this or the M1 series? (My god, the M1 really sucked with CPU and storage issues)
That's a REALLY low bar to aim for.



P.S: They had a really shitty, smeary flickering display too. Amazing.

Notebook check on the M2 Max, since they dont have an ultra review
Apple M2 Pro and M2 Max analysis - GPU is more efficient, the CPU not always - NotebookCheck.net Reviews

Apple: 20% faster!
Reality: 7% faster

The M2 Max could juuuust keep up with an intel i7 - a 28W CPU with 4 P cores

Multi threaded can keep up with a 12700H... just uh, nor for very long.
M2 MacBook Pro hits 108 degrees Celsius and exposes 'severe throttling | iMore

 

[mrnagant]

My Intel MBP had the 6 core model. I was offered the 8core but knew the 6 core would already suffer cooling issues. I ran F@H on it, which I know is really stressful on the CPU which is what I wanted to test. At first, 6 cores was wicked fast cranking estimated at like 120k ppd, but then it throttled and the CPU fans went off the charts. 3 cores I was sitting around ~30k ppd, where running 6 cores was no faster after it throttled. Even just using MS Teams, the fan on that thing would become very audible, and doing other things it was barely over 1 CPU of utilization.
So basically if you wanted to use this CPU to its fullest potential, it was impossible. They could have just put in some 2C/4T or 4C/4T Intel CPU, call it the Intel Mega Max processor and kept prices the same. You'd get the same performance out of it.

 

[Mussels]

My Intel MBP had the 6 core model. I was offered the 8core but knew the 6 core would already suffer cooling issues. I ran F@H on it, which I know is really stressful on the CPU which is what I wanted to test. At first, 6 cores was wicked fast cranking estimated at like 120k ppd, but then it throttled and the CPU fans went off the charts. 3 cores I was sitting around ~30k ppd, where running 6 cores was no faster after it throttled. Even just using MS Teams, the fan on that thing would become very audible, and doing other things it was barely over 1 CPU of utilization.
So basically if you wanted to use this CPU to its fullest potential, it was impossible. They could have just put in some 2C/4T or 4C/4T Intel CPU, call it the Intel Mega Max processor and kept prices the same. You'd get the same performance out of it.

Thats why they moved to 4 core, they couldnt sustain the performance in the size they wanted with intels power characteristics


They wanted their own architecture CPU's for the same reason they do with their mobile products - so they take a cut every single step of the process, it adds up if you make even 1% profit per step of the process but you're the sole producer of every single component and accessory and don't sell spare parts for repairs.

It's just a sign of the times that the CPU world got stagnant, that even with all their money and an architecture better for mobile (ARM64), they still couldn't beat intel after designing cut-back hardware with a limited OS to ensure every process it can run is designed for that hardware - it's like game console levels of design efficiency, but they used it to make more profit and not a better product.

I like competition. proprietary hardware and software are not competition, they're exclusionary.

 

[Lew Zealand]

Thats why they moved to 4 core, they couldnt sustain the performance in the size they wanted with intels power characteristics

Where did they move to a 4-core? Was it in what you posted here:

Because you're listing a 16" MacBook Pro and then a 13" MacBook Pro. Those are different product lines, Apple sells more than one line of MBPs. And you mix some reasonable criticism like the screen (response time sucks though Apple seems to care more about gamut) with other random stuff.

Also I don't see where you get your 85% performance number from in your claim about performance when other models in the article you link with the same processor are less than 10% faster and some are slower. Those slower were cropped out of your pic, oops. The only one thats considerably faster is a 50% heavier gaming laptop. That's not really a comparable. In general the examples seem cherrypicked, like compare Single core performance and ignoring Multicore when most computers are used taking advantage of all their cores. OK, more than one if not all 8 or 14 or 16 nowadays.

I agree that the 8-core MacBook Pros have little value over the 6-core, which is why I recommend my wife get the 6-core when it was her turn for work to buy a new one, but this post seems to be a rant about Apple instead of being about the M2 Ultra.

 

[claes]

More, this is a whole other architecture on the entry level MacBook. MacBook Pro > MacBook > MacBook Air. This is basically a netbook in Apple’s hierarchy (notebook check calls it a sub-notebook), and is passively cooled. It’s not designed for gaming (no Mac is) or av work, it’s for web browsing and office work.

One could look at notebook check’s review of the pro but it might not make for a cohesive narrative

Apple MacBook Pro 16 2021 M1 Max Laptop Review: Full Performance without Throttling

Notebookcheck reviews the brand-new Apple MacBook Pro 16 with the M1 Max SoC, 32 GPU cores, 64 GB RAM and 16.2-inch Mini-LED screen and 120 Hz.

www.notebookcheck.net

Apple MacBook Air M2 Entry Review – A very good, but too expensive daily MacBook

Notebookcheck reviews the new Apple MacBook Air M2 Midnight in the base-level spec with 8 GB RAM and 256 GB SSD storage.

www.notebookcheck.net

 

[Mussels]

Where did they move to a 4-core? Was it in what you posted here:

Because you're listing a 16" MacBook Pro and then a 13" MacBook Pro. Those are different product lines, Apple sells more than one line of MBPs. And you mix some reasonable criticism like the screen (response time sucks though Apple seems to care more about gamut) with other random stuff.

Also I don't see where you get your 85% performance number from in your claim about performance when other models in the article you link with the same processor are less than 10% faster and some are slower. Those slower were cropped out of your pic, oops. The only one thats considerably faster is a 50% heavier gaming laptop. That's not really a comparable. In general the examples seem cherrypicked, like compare Single core performance and ignoring Multicore when most computers are used taking advantage of all their cores. OK, more than one if not all 8 or 14 or 16 nowadays.

I agree that the 8-core MacBook Pros have little value over the 6-core, which is why I recommend my wife get the 6-core when it was her turn for work to buy a new one, but this post seems to be a rant about Apple instead of being about the M2 Ultra.

the 2020 models after the 2019 - they stopped releasing 16" and only used 13" 4 cores after that

Also I don't see where you get your 85% performance number from in your claim about performance when other models in the article you link with the same processor are less than 10% faster and some are slower. Those slower were cropped out of your pic, oops. The only one thats considerably faster is a 50% heavier gaming laptop. That's not really a comparable. In general the examples seem cherrypicked, like compare Single core performance and ignoring Multicore when most computers are used taking advantage of all their cores. OK, more than one if not all 8 or 14 or 16 nowadays.

I agree that the 8-core MacBook Pros have little value over the 6-core, which is why I recommend my wife get the 6-core when it was her turn for work to buy a new one, but this post seems to be a rant about Apple instead of being about the M2 Ultra.

I linked to every single thing I repeated, including screenshots. You can spend more time looking, i'm not spending more time handholding.

 

[claes]

I think you’re misunderstanding that the 13” and 16” are two different product lines. One used U processors, the other used H. One was limited to integrated graphics, the other had the option for discrete.

 

[Lew Zealand]

the 2020 models after the 2019 - they stopped releasing 16" and only used 13" 4 cores after that


I linked to every single thing I repeated, including screenshots. You can spend more time looking, i'm not spending more time handholding.

The 15/16" and the 13" have used different lines of processors back to the early Core i days in 2011 and Apple continued selling the 16" as their top end laptop along with their 13" line until both separate lines were replaced by M1 processors. And Apple did update that 2019 model in 2020 with a new GPU option and chose to keep the 2019 moniker. The 2020 13" did not replace any 16" model, it only replaced the 2019 13" MacBook Pro. Getting details wrong about that does not inspire confidence in the rest of your post.

I already spent time looking before and you cherrypicked which is fine, you choose your favorite things to make your point. It is only part of the story.

 

[Mussels]

I think you’re misunderstanding that the 13” and 16” are two different product lines. One used U processors, the other used H. One was limited to integrated graphics, the other had the option for discrete.

No, i'm saying they stopped making the larger products from that point on and only made the smaller ones.
Or is this just you feeling like arguing with me in multiple threads?

It's reaching the point of trolling when it's in multiple threads and derailing them all.

 

[TrumpKing]

In a Mac Studio? Sure.

In a Mac Pro? Ehhhhh not enough cores or memory for truly intensive CPU loads.

Professionals should wait for M3 Extreme or whatever Apple wants to call it.

I bet the M3 is going to be just as unsatisfying as M2. Apple silicon is no longer suitable for any professional work other than video editing. The poor capacity of total memory and incompatible processor arch for Python IDE and MATLAB are driving people away from it. It is an ultimate big iPad Pro only.