Skip to content
RU

Apple M2 Max vs Apple M4: specs and benchmark comparison

AApple · ARM64

Apple M2 Max

  • 12 cores

2023

BApple · ARM64

Apple M4

    2024

    Short verdict

    Apple M2 Max leads in every scenario with comparable benchmarks: multi-thread performance. This does not imply an advantage in tasks without benchmarks.

    Compare with AI
    ← Apple M2 MaxApple M4 →

    • Multi-thread performance

      A +16.2%

      Apple M2 Max leads in this scenario (up to 16.2% in comparable benchmarks).

    No comparable benchmarks yet: single-thread performance, gaming (cpu-bound scenarios), power efficiency.

    Advantages

    Only measured and rated values: a noticeable benchmark gap and specs where more is better.

    Where Apple M2 Max is better2

    • Blender Benchmark 4.5.0 16.2% faster261 samples/min vs 224 samples/min

    • Max memory capacity 64 GB more96 GB vs 32 GB

    Where Apple M4 is better0

    No advantages found in our data.

    Benchmarks

    Results are compared within one benchmark, one version and the same conditions.

    • Blender Benchmark 4.5.0

      CPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom · samples/min, higher is better

      A ahead by 16.2%

      Position among tested models (89)

      B · 224A · 261
      0200400600800
      Each dot is one model’s median in this benchmark. The scale starts at zero, samples/min.

      Apple M2 Max is ahead by 16.2% in this benchmark.

      About the measurement and source
      A · Apple M2 Max

      260.8 samples/min · community measurement, sample 34 · November 14, 2026

      Blender Open Data (Blender Foundation)

      Median of 34 submissions (3 outliers excluded), interquartile range 257.19–264.06; submissions 2025-07-17 to 2026-04-08; CPU backend. Snapshot 2026-11-14.

      B · Apple M4

      224.3 samples/min · community measurement, sample 245 · November 14, 2026

      Blender Open Data (Blender Foundation)

      Median of 245 submissions (13 outliers excluded), interquartile range 216.82–236.23; submissions 2025-07-17 to 2026-05-09; CPU backend. Snapshot 2026-11-14.

      difference = |A − B| ÷ the smaller value × 100%. The 5% noticeable threshold is a UX heuristic, not statistical significance.

      Cycles render in Blender Benchmark. Median of the sum of samples per minute over three scenes after removing outliers.

    Other comparable benchmarks (3)
    BenchmarkABDifference
    Blender Benchmark 4.2.0CPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom251.7231.3A +8.8%
    Blender Benchmark 4.3.0CPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom251.8234A +7.6%
    Blender Benchmark 4.4.0CPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom256.2222.1A +15.3%

    Each benchmark version has its own scale: numbers are compared only within a row.

    Reference results (12)
    BenchmarkABDifference
    Blender Benchmark 5.1.1CPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom252.1215.8reference
    Blender Benchmark 5.2.0CPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom244.8214.2reference
    Blender Benchmark 3.2.1CPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom244.5—no pair
    Blender Benchmark 3.3.0CPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom263.5—no pair
    Blender Benchmark 3.4.0CPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom254.1—no pair
    Blender Benchmark 3.5.0CPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom252.9—no pair
    Blender Benchmark 3.6.0CPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom254.4230.7reference
    Blender Benchmark 4.0.0CPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom255.2232reference
    Blender Benchmark 4.1.0CPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom249214.2reference
    Blender Benchmark 5.0.0CPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom243.7220.1reference
    Blender Benchmark 5.1.0CPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom256.2216.8reference
    Blender Benchmark 5.3.0CPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom215.5205.5reference

    Each benchmark version has its own scale: numbers are compared only within a row.

    Specifications

    Cores and clocks

    • Cores

      A12 (8P + 4E)

      Bno data

      no data for B

      Cores of different types may differ in performance.

    Platform

    • Process node

      A5 nm

      B3 nm

      differs

    Memory and interfaces

    • Memory type

      AUnified memory

      BUnified memory

      equal

    • Max memory capacity

      A96 GB

      B32 GB

      A: 64 GB more

    • Integrated graphics

      AApple M2 Max (30 / 38-core GPU)

      BApple M4 (8 / 10-core GPU)

      differs

    “More” does not always mean “better”: higher power draw or size is a system requirement, not an advantage (such bars are dimmed).

    Compare with AI

    An AI model reviews the specs and benchmarks of this pair and gives a plain-language verdict on who each model suits.

    AI verdict

    Questions and answers

    Do these CPUs have integrated graphics?

    Apple M2 Max: Apple M2 Max (30 / 38-core GPU). Apple M4: Apple M4 (8 / 10-core GPU).

    Which is faster: Apple M2 Max or Apple M4?

    Apple M2 Max leads in every scenario with comparable benchmarks: multi-thread performance. This does not imply an advantage in tasks without benchmarks.

    Data sources (2)
    • Apple — specifications of Apple M2 Max, specifications of Apple M4checked November 14, 2026
    • Blender Open Data (Blender Foundation) — benchmark Blender Benchmark 4.2.0, benchmark Blender Benchmark 4.5.0, benchmark Blender Benchmark 5.1.1, benchmark Blender Benchmark 5.2.0, benchmark Blender Benchmark 3.2.1, benchmark Blender Benchmark 3.3.0, benchmark Blender Benchmark 3.4.0, benchmark Blender Benchmark 3.5.0, benchmark Blender Benchmark 3.6.0, benchmark Blender Benchmark 4.0.0, benchmark Blender Benchmark 4.1.0, benchmark Blender Benchmark 4.3.0, benchmark Blender Benchmark 4.4.0, benchmark Blender Benchmark 5.0.0, benchmark Blender Benchmark 5.1.0, benchmark Blender Benchmark 5.3.0checked November 14, 2026

    How we compare: methodology. Where the data comes from: sources.

    TelegramVK