I think that’s the point. If you’re doing graphics design or rendering, you should be using an max. Pro is a like office apps, some programming, etc. and the baser model for people that want to play media and browse socialmedia.
It’s in the linked article. Search for “blender” and it’s the second instance that’s for GPU. M3 Pro is half the performance of the slowest 4050 mobile to almost 1/3 of the fastest 4050 mobile.
Bruh. They tested it on blender 3.3🤦🤦🤦. It doesn’t use the M3 RT cores. Only 4.0 has proper metal RT support. Wish notebookcheck actually used the latest blender version rather than the outdated ones.
In blender 4.0 the M3 Max is between a 4070 and 4080 laptop. Closer to the 4080.
It’s already been tested on Blender 4.0. M3 Pro is nearly half the performance of 4050 mobile. And, M3 Max is less than half the performance of 4090 mobile.
Still destroyed on Blender GPU by low end 4050 mobile.
Its tested using blender 3.3. No support for RT cores on M3.
I think that’s the point. If you’re doing graphics design or rendering, you should be using an max. Pro is a like office apps, some programming, etc. and the baser model for people that want to play media and browse socialmedia.
It’s a pretty nice lineup.
Got a figure for that?
It’s in the linked article. Search for “blender” and it’s the second instance that’s for GPU. M3 Pro is half the performance of the slowest 4050 mobile to almost 1/3 of the fastest 4050 mobile.
Bruh. They tested it on blender 3.3🤦🤦🤦. It doesn’t use the M3 RT cores. Only 4.0 has proper metal RT support. Wish notebookcheck actually used the latest blender version rather than the outdated ones.
In blender 4.0 the M3 Max is between a 4070 and 4080 laptop. Closer to the 4080.
It’s already been tested on Blender 4.0. M3 Pro is nearly half the performance of 4050 mobile. And, M3 Max is less than half the performance of 4090 mobile.