Apple M4 Max 16-Core: Stronger than M5 Pro in GPU, but Weaker in CPU

Apple M4 Max 16-Core is the high-end configuration of the M4 Max. It features a 16-core CPU with 12 performance cores and 4 efficiency cores, a 40-core GPU, a 16-core Neural Engine, and unified memory with a bandwidth of 546 GB/s.

In 2026, the M4 Max 16-Core lags behind the M5 Pro in CPU performance but remains superior in tasks where GPU, memory bandwidth, and ProRes are critical. Thus, comparisons based solely on CPU benchmarks provide an incomplete picture. The intention of this version is to leverage the 40-core GPU, up to 128 GB of unified memory, high memory bandwidth, and an expanded media block.

Models with Apple M4 Max 16-Core

The Apple M4 Max 16-Core is found in high-end configurations of Macs:

• MacBook Pro 14-inch 2024 - M4 Max 16-core CPU / 40-core GPU;
• MacBook Pro 16-inch 2024 - M4 Max 16-core CPU / 40-core GPU;
• Mac Studio 2025 - M4 Max 16-core CPU / 40-core GPU.

In addition to the high-end version, the M4 Max was also released in a configuration with a 14-core CPU and a 32-core GPU. Therefore, when comparing, it is essential to consider not only the M4 Max name but also the specific CPU/GPU configuration.

The M4 Max 16-Core configuration maximizes GPU performance, full memory bandwidth, and supports unified memory of up to 128 GB.

CPU Benchmarks: M5 Pro is Already Faster

Below are the benchmarks from Notebookcheck and Geekbench Browser. The values depend on the device, cooling, power mode, test version, and memory configuration. For M4 Max, it is important to distinguish between the MacBook Pro and Mac Studio: in a desktop body, the chip maintains prolonged load easier, while in a laptop, the balance of performance, noise, and battery life affects it more significantly.

In CPU performance, the M4 Max 16-Core is significantly faster than the M3 Max, but it falls short against the M5 Pro. The difference with the M3 Max is about 24% in Geekbench Single, 21% in Geekbench Multi, and 33% in Cinebench 2024 Multi. Compared to the M4 Pro, the gains are only apparent in multi-threaded tasks: around 14% in Geekbench Multi and about 20% in Cinebench 2024 Multi. In single-threaded tasks, the M4 Max and M4 Pro are nearly indistinguishable.

The M5 Pro 18-Core outpaces the M4 Max 16-Core by about 11% in Geekbench Single, 10% in Geekbench Multi, and 15% in Cinebench 2024 Multi. Therefore, the M4 Max can no longer be considered the best choice solely for CPU performance. For tasks such as compilation, CPU rendering, and calculations, the new M5 Pro often appears stronger.

CPU benchmarks do not reveal the main advantage of the M4 Max. This chip should be evaluated alongside its GPU, memory, and media block.

GPU Benchmarks: M4 Max Has an Edge Over M5 Pro

When considering CPU alone, the M5 Pro looks more convincing. In graphics tests, the advantage of the M4 Max's 40-Core GPU becomes evident.

In Geekbench Metal, the M4 Max 40-Core GPU outperforms the M5 Pro 20-Core GPU by about 31%. In Blender Metal, the difference is even more pronounced: 17.8 seconds versus 36.6 seconds. In 3DMark Steel Nomad Light, the M4 Max also leads: 14211 vs. 10018 points.

These results explain why the M4 Max remains relevant after the release of the M5 Pro. The new Pro chip excels in CPU performance, but its 20-core GPU does not replace the M4 Max's 40-core graphics. If the workload involves Metal, Blender, GPU rendering, 3D, effects, local AI tasks on the GPU, or heavy scenes, the M4 Max remains significantly faster.

M4 Max vs. M5 Pro

There is no universal winner between the M4 Max 16-Core and the M5 Pro 18-Core. The M5 Pro is faster in CPU tests, while the M4 Max retains the advantage in GPU tests. Therefore, the choice depends on which part of the system constrains the workflow.

The M5 Pro is more logical if the primary workload involves compilation, CPU rendering, calculations, project building, data processing, and routine multitasking. It is newer and faster in terms of CPU.

The M4 Max 16-Core is justified if the work hinges on graphics, memory, ProRes, heavy timelines, 3D scenes, large projects in Metal applications, and local AI models. It features double the GPU cores, higher memory bandwidth, and greater available unified memory.

In summary: for CPU tasks, the M5 Pro is more sensible; for GPU, memory, and video-related tasks, the M4 Max is the better choice.

M4 Max 16-Core vs. M4 Pro

The M4 Pro 14-Core and M4 Max 16-Core are close in single-thread speed. In everyday tasks such as browsing, interface usage, light development, and short operations, the difference between them is likely to be minimal.

The difference with the M4 Pro becomes evident in tasks that utilize GPU, memory, and media block: 3D, GPU rendering, Metal applications, local AI models, intensive editing, and multiple ProRes streams. If the workflow does not depend on these components, the M4 Pro is often the more rational choice.

The decision between the M4 Pro and M4 Max should not solely focus on CPU performance. The M4 Pro can handle many compilation tasks and typical multitasking efficiently. The M4 Max is justified for graphics, video, large projects, and prolonged mixed loads.

GPU, Memory, and Media Block

The 40-core GPU is the primary argument in favor of the M4 Max compared to the M4 Pro and M5 Pro. It is designed for demanding Metal workloads, 3D rendering, GPU-accelerated effects, local AI tasks, and large projects. In gaming, performance may depend on macOS, Metal, and the specific game, which is why the M4 Max is more appropriately assessed as a professional SoC for GPU workloads rather than as a gaming chip.

The 546 GB/s memory bandwidth is the second key argument. Unified memory is utilized by the CPU, GPU, Neural Engine, and media blocks. The heavier the scene, project, or local model, the more critical bandwidth becomes, in addition to the amount of RAM. Configurations with up to 128 GB of unified memory are necessary for projects and local models that require more memory than the lower configurations can provide.

The media block in the M4 Max supports H.264, HEVC, ProRes, ProRes RAW, AV1 decode, two video encoding engines, and two ProRes encode/decode engines. For multi-threaded ProRes, heavy timelines, and regular exports, this capability is often more important than the differences in CPU benchmarks.

MacBook Pro vs. Mac Studio with M4 Max

The same M4 Max 16-Core can be found in the MacBook Pro and Mac Studio, but the scenarios differ. The MacBook Pro offers mobility, a display, battery life, and high performance in a laptop form factor. The Mac Studio is designed for prolonged stationary workloads, external monitors, ports, and more robust cooling under sustained loads.

If mobility is essential, the MacBook Pro 16 with M4 Max makes more sense. It is suitable for video editing, 3D, development, photography, videography, and large projects outside the office. The MacBook Pro 14 is more compact, but under sustained full load, its chassis and cooling will restrict the chip more than in the 16-inch model.

The Mac Studio with M4 Max makes sense if a laptop is not needed. It is a more suitable option for prolonged rendering, encoding, local AI tasks, working with multiple displays, and desktop setups.

Comparison with Windows Chips

The M4 Max 16-Core remains a powerful mobile SoC but cannot be deemed an absolute winner against Windows chips. In Geekbench Multi, it is higher than the Snapdragon X2 Elite Extreme, and in Cinebench 2024 Multi, the results are close. Powerful x86-HX platforms may outperform in certain multi-threaded tests, especially at high power limits.

The difference is not just in scores. Windows laptops often feature discrete GPUs, gaming compatibility, a range of display options, pricing, and configurations. The advantages of the M4 Max include energy efficiency, unified memory, a strong media block, macOS, and high performance in tasks optimized for Apple Silicon.

The correct conclusion: the M4 Max 16-Core is one of the strong notebook SoCs of its generation, but its main value lies not in CPU records but in the combination of CPU, GPU, memory, and media engines.

Who Is Apple M4 Max 16-Core For?

The Apple M4 Max 16-Core is aimed at users who need powerful graphics, a large volume of unified memory, and an extended media block. This includes video editors, 3D artists, developers, photographers, engineers, specialists in local AI tasks, and users who handle heavy projects daily.

Rational scenarios include 4K/8K editing, multiple ProRes streams, DaVinci Resolve, Final Cut Pro, 3D applications, GPU rendering, large projects in Xcode, containers, virtual machines, local AI models, batch processing of photos, and working with large datasets.

If the primary workload involves browsing, office tasks, light development, photography, and regular multitasking, the M4 Max is overkill. If only CPU performance is needed, the M5 Pro may be a more reasonable choice. The M4 Max 16-Core is justified in tasks involving GPU, memory, ProRes, or prolonged mixed workloads.

Conclusion

Apple's M4 Max 16-Core may no longer be the leader in CPU performance among Apple Silicon, but it remains a powerful configuration for GPU, memory, and media tasks. The M5 Pro 18-Core is faster in processor tests, but the M4 Max offers a 40-core GPU, 546 GB/s memory bandwidth, support for up to 128 GB of unified memory, and an expanded media block.

The core reason for choosing M4 Max 16-Core lies in graphics, memory, ProRes, heavyweight video, 3D, local AI models, and prolonged mixed workloads. Buying it solely for CPU performance is no longer as logical: it is better to compare the M5 Pro and M5 Max for that purpose.

If workflow tasks are CPU-bound, the new M5 Pro will be stronger. If GPU workloads, a large volume of unified memory, Metal applications, ProRes, and demanding media projects are important, the M4 Max 16-Core remains a relevant configuration for professional Macs.