@atpfm@mastodon.social I disagree with your assessment of the Pro chips. • The M1 Pro and M2 Pro were both chopped versions of their Max counterparts, basically same CPU but with fewer GPU cores and lower RAM ceiling (you remarked this in the episode about the M1, but not about its successor) • The M3 Pro was the weird sideways movement, while simultaneously the M3 Max had a huge boost with 4 extra P-cores BUT costing $200–$600 more than before (this means the M3 generation had no real equivalent to the M1/M2 Max, if you can’t simply increase your budget by this much) • The M4 Pro was a huge upgrade, catching up to everything the M3 Pro missed and then some. It filled most of the roles of the M1/M2 Max without a price increase. The M4 Max charges a ton for diminishing returns (for example: if your priority is CPU, it’s a minimum of $900 extra for at most 2 additional P-cores). Many reviewers, like Max Tech, concluded the M4 Pro was the best value of its generation https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BDpNDniE1PA I do think Apple needs to address the naming mess (the “MacBook Pro with M4 Chip” is very different from the models with either M4 Pro or Max in many regards, but the name sounds like it describes the entire generation), and retiring the “Pro” chip name might be one way to improve the status quo. But it’s very important to fill the huge gap between the base chips and today’s Max chips, whatever you call it.