Apple M2 Max vs Apple M5: specs and benchmark comparison
Short verdict
Apple M5 leads in every scenario with comparable benchmarks: multi-thread performance. This does not imply an advantage in tasks without benchmarks.
Compare with AIMulti-thread performance
B +5.7%Apple M5 leads in this scenario (up to 5.7% 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
Cores 2 more12 (8P + 4E) vs 10 (4P + 6E)
Max memory capacity 64 GB more96 GB vs 32 GB
Where Apple M5 is better1
Blender Benchmark 4.5.0 5.7% faster276 samples/min vs 261 samples/min
Benchmarks
Results are compared within one benchmark, one version and the same conditions.
- B ahead by 5.7%
Blender Benchmark 4.5.0
CPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom · samples/min, higher is better
Apple M2 Max260.8 samples/minApple M5275.7 samples/minPosition among tested models (89)
A · 261B · 2760200400600800Each dot is one model’s median in this benchmark. The scale starts at zero, samples/min. Apple M5 is ahead by 5.7% 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 M5
275.7 samples/min · community measurement, sample 42 · November 14, 2026
Blender Open Data (Blender Foundation)
Median of 42 submissions (6 outliers excluded), interquartile range 270.87–280.37; submissions 2025-10-17 to 2026-08-12; 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.
Reference results (15)
| Benchmark | A | B | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Blender Benchmark 4.2.0CPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom | 251.7 | 226.4 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 5.1.1CPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom | 252.1 | 250.5 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 5.2.0CPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom | 244.8 | 242.3 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 3.2.1CPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom | 244.5 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 3.3.0CPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom | 263.5 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 3.4.0CPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom | 254.1 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 3.5.0CPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom | 252.9 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 3.6.0CPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom | 254.4 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 4.0.0CPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom | 255.2 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 4.1.0CPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom | 249 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 4.3.0CPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom | 251.8 | 248.2 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 4.4.0CPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom | 256.2 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 5.0.0CPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom | 243.7 | 247.8 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 5.1.0CPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom | 256.2 | 247.8 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 5.3.0CPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom | 215.5 | 245.8 | reference |
Each benchmark version has its own scale: numbers are compared only within a row.
Specifications
| Specification | A · Apple M2 Max | B · Apple M5 | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Cores and clocks | |||
| CoresCores of different types may differ in performance. | 12 (8P + 4E) | 10 (4P + 6E) | A: 2 more |
| Platform | |||
| Process node | 5 nm | 3 nm | differs |
| Memory and interfaces | |||
| Memory type | Unified memory | Unified memory | equal |
| Max memory capacity | 96 GB | 32 GB | A: 64 GB more |
| Integrated graphics | Apple M2 Max (30 / 38-core GPU) | Apple M5 (8 / 10-core GPU) | differs |
Cores and clocks
Cores
A12 (8P + 4E)
B10 (4P + 6E)
A: 2 moreCores of different types may differ in performance.
Platform
Process node
A5 nm
B3 nm
differs
Memory and interfaces
Memory type
AUnified memory
BUnified memory
equalMax memory capacity
A96 GB
B32 GB
A: 64 GB moreIntegrated graphics
AApple M2 Max (30 / 38-core GPU)
BApple M5 (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.
Questions and answers
Do these CPUs have integrated graphics?
Apple M2 Max: Apple M2 Max (30 / 38-core GPU). Apple M5: Apple M5 (8 / 10-core GPU).
Which is faster: Apple M2 Max or Apple M5?
Apple M5 leads in every scenario with comparable benchmarks: multi-thread performance. This does not imply an advantage in tasks without benchmarks.
See also
Data sources (2)
- Apple — specifications of Apple M2 Max, specifications of Apple M5checked 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.