Hacker News Reader

Comment by aqme28 | Hacker News Reader

So there's an M2 Ultra, M2 Max, and M2 Pro. I hate this naming scheme. It is totally unclear how you're supposed to order those in terms of performance.

View on HN

Max kinda makes sense compared to the other level, since it's the full-spec part, and the others are lower-binned derivatives. Since Ultra is really two Max-grade chips welded together, seems like they should have done something like M2 Duo ... ah.

I think Apple kind of realizes that the naming doesn't really matter.

Even with the Intel i-series, you're not looking at the model name to make a purchase decision. You're looking at the technical specs.

which makes the name redundantly uninformative! So why not make the differentiating technical spec part of the name, or have something similar like M2 XXXXX where XXXXX is the number being comparable?

It still has some value. It indicates a group of product.

Non-sequential naming also gives them the flexibility to shift new products into the category over time. They do this with the M1/M2 in the iPad.

Because that's what the others are doing with their i6-12345B and it makes even less sense than three simple names anyone can memorize in two minutes.

Nah, Apple thinks these names are perfect.

I think it's more comparable to GPU naming. 40XX gives me the generation, and the XX part (e.g. "4060"/"3080 Ti", etc gives me relative the performance within that group. Except instead of something informative, Apple just goes with an arbitrary word that means "the best."

Can't wait for M2 Epic, M2 Extreme models...

They never came for M1, why do you think they'll come for M2?

The average person does not care and learns the hierarchy directly from the marketing materials, not from incomprehensible (to laypeople) technical specifications.

It's a very confusing naming scheme. For the layman it's unclear whether Ultra is better than Pro or vice versa, or Max is the fastest one.

just look at the price

I think it makes sense if you think about it. “Max” is pretty objective, it means the highest limit of something, so that’s the most powerful. “Ultra” isn’t very clear, but we know it’s lower than Max and higher than “not ultra”, so it’s in the middle. Since both “max” and “ultra” imply something not just better but larger, we can conclude that the plain M2 is the version targeted at more power efficient devices. Finally, Pro stands out as the only modifier clearly unrelated to computing performance, so it must have to do with “professional” features, like ECC RAM and MDM.

Can't tell if this is sarcastic or not. First, it's just wrong, as the M2 Ultra is more powerful than the M2 Max. I could easily justify these adjectives being in any order.

"ultra" means "beyond" as in "beyond a limit" so it makes some sense for it to be more powerful than Max. Not saying that the naming is clear.

M2 Max+ 2.0

Can't wait for the M2 Max Ultra Pro.

I’m pretty sure this comment is describing a totally plausible but wrong ranking as a means of pointing out how ridiculous the names are.

I think it is hard to justify a ranking that puts anything above “max” unless you are designing for Spinal Tap.

Everytime I think of Ultra, I think of MK Ultra - very dangerous. Max, well, he is my nephew - nice kid, not so dangerous. Pro - I am a pro, pro must be amazing. So I say, Ultra > Pro > Max. There, I solved it.

Max is Max Headroom, of course.

Thanks - I had seen his photo but never knew the name.

You forgot the basic M2. As far as ordering them in terms of performance, the prices make that pretty clear.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com