[jxcl]

If you look at the specs of the regular, Pro and Max chips on the M1 and M3 generations, it's easier to see M1 Pro as a sort of "Max Lite" chip. You got identical CPU core counts on both the Pro and Max variants in the M1 and M2 generations, but that's no longer true with the M3.

Apple seems to have realized that people with only CPU heavy workloads won't buy the Max variant, so it seems to me they've weakened the Pro line on the M3 to push more people toward the Max.

[freeAgent]

Yeah, the changes they made to the M3 Pro were all about making it a less attractive option for people with CPU-heavy workloads who didn’t need/want the GPU horsepower. Unfortunately, it seems that in order to chase this product stratification goal, they actually made the newest generation chip perform worse than the previous generations.

[wiremonger]

IMO the significant differences in how Pro and Max are stratified in M1/M2 vs M3 will probably make a lot more sense when M3 Ultra comes out.

[freeAgent]

I think it “makes sense” already. The previous generations of Pro were too tempting and Apple probably feels that hobbling them will push people to spend more on Max chips. I also bet the new Pro chips are less costly (node issues aside) since they have many fewer P cores. It’s just sad that the new M3 Pro is a sidegrade at best. I’m hoping M4 shows an actual performance increase for Pro chips now that they’re (hopefully) done cutting the P cores.