OVERALL
ALTERNATIVES
SPECS
VS AVERAGE
REVIEWS
Scored using Processors Methodology v3.0
Processors Methodology v3.0
Mathematical & Unbiased Scoring
Products in this category are scored under Frontum Processors Methodology v3.0: the technical score from the specifications is the base, and independent expert and video reviews (up to ±0.5 points), owner opinions (up to ±0.3) and best-of lists (up to +0.3) move it up or down.
Explore Processors Methodology v3.0

Apple M2 Pro 12-core CPU 19-core GPU review: 74 specs compared

Avg. price:~£2,110PassMark multi-core score:26697N. of physical cores:12CPU boost clock speed:3.5 GHzCPU socket:N/ATDP (Thermal design power):30 W

Apple M2 Pro 12-core CPU 19-core GPU Review: Compare 74 technical specifications and 9 expert and video reviews to see how this product ranks in the Processors category and whether it is worth buying.

7.7/10

Overall score

Score
7.7/ 10
✕
What it is
Our main score for this model, 1–10. It combines specs, expert reviews, best-of lists and owners.
How we count it
Parts: Technical score 40%, Reviews score 25%, List score 25%, Sentiment score 10%
Marks: Each part gets a mark out of 10. For reviews, lists and owners, a typical model in this category gets about 8 and the best one gets 10.
No data yet: A part with no data shows "?". It counts as the mark of a weaker model in this category (4 in 5 models with data score higher). This way, models with reviews, lists and owners usually come out ahead.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–² Better than 85% of models
Score components

40%

7.5

Technical score

25%

8.5

Reviews score

25%

?

List scoreNot enough data yet, so we use 7.5, the mark of a weaker model in this category

10%

?

Sentiment scoreNot enough data yet, so we use 7.0, the mark of a weaker model in this category

â–²Better than 85% of processors
5.7

Value for money

Value for money
5.7/ 10
✕
What it is
An indicator that combines the processor's overall rating with its cost.
When it matters
When you are looking for a processor with a good balance between performance, efficiency, and price.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 99% of models
Score components

70%

7.7

Overall score

30%

1.0

Price

â–¼Worse than 99%
7.5

Technical score

Technical score
7.5/ 10
✕
What it is
How good the specs are compared with the other models in this category, 1–10.
How we count it
Areas: We rate the specs in each area against the other models in this category.
Weighting: The areas that matter most to buyers count more. The shares are shown under Score components.
Share: The technical score is 40% of the overall score.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–² Better than 78% of models
Score components

60%

8.0

Performance

18%

6.6

Architecture

10%

7.1

Memory & PCIe

7%

6.5

Power & Thermal

4%

6.4

Platform

1%

8.2

Integrated graphics

â–²Better than 78%
8.5

Reviews score

Reviews score
8.5/ 10
✕
What it is
Average grade from independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers, 1–10.
How we count it
Grades: Each review's own score is converted to 1–10; without one, we grade the review ourselves. Big test sites count more, short reviews half as much as full tests. A video review counts half.
Score: The average grade is 80% of the review mark; the number of reviews is the other 20% (1 review = 5, the typical number in this category = 8, the most-reviewed model = 10).
Enough data: With few reviews, the average grade is pulled toward the typical grade of this category. No reviews yet: 7.2 for now.
Share: Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
★ Better than 92% of models

80%

8.4

Average grade

20%

8.6

Popularity

Grades by review (9)
1 review, with a printed score. 8 video reviews, each counting half as much as a written test. Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
User ratings collected online are not part of this score.
★Better than 92%
?

List score

List score
7.5/ 10
✕
What it is
How often independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers put this model in their best-of lists for this category.
How we count it
Points: The model in the most lists of this category gets 10; the others get 8 to 10 in proportion. In no list yet: 7.5. Lists count 25% of the overall score.
Enough data: Every list counts, even a single one. With fewer than 5 best-of lists in the category, this part is left out.
Lists with this model (0)
Not in any best-of list yet, so this part counts as 7.5. Models in a list get 8 to 10.
Not in any best-of list yet
  • No image
No image
Where to buy
    N/A~ £2,110
Best rankings
Available: ranking among products currently available (including other versions of this product).All: ranking among all products in the database.

What reviewers say about the Apple M2 Pro 12-core CPU 19-core GPU

Based on 1 · 8

Reviewers praise its creative editing power and overall speed, but call it a weak upgrade with stingy memory and storage.
Praised
Mixed views
Criticised
Pick a topic to see who said what
Loading category ranking...

Technical Specifications of processor Apple M2 Pro 12-core CPU 19-core GPU

Technical score
Technical score
7.5/ 10
✕
What it is
How good the specs are compared with the other models in this category, 1–10.
How we count it
Areas: We rate the specs in each area against the other models in this category.
Weighting: The areas that matter most to buyers count more. The shares are shown under Score components.
Share: The technical score is 40% of the overall score.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–² Better than 78% of models
Score components:

60%

8.0

Performance

18%

6.6

Architecture

10%

7.1

Memory & PCIe

7%

6.5

Power & Thermal

4%

6.4

Platform

1%

8.2

Integrated graphics

7.5
Reviews score
8.5
List score
?
Value for money
Value for money
5.7/ 10
✕
What it is
An indicator that combines the processor's overall rating with its cost.
When it matters
When you are looking for a processor with a good balance between performance, efficiency, and price.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 99% of models
Score components:

70%

7.7

Overall score

30%

1.0

Price

5.7
Processor type
desktop
This processor belongs to the desktop processor class, which is more advanced than that of 54.7% of processors and equal to that of 39.5% of processors.
CPU socket
N/A
Chipset
N/A
CPU architecture
ARM64
This processor uses the ARM64 architecture, which is less advanced than that of 98.2% of processors and equal to that of 1.8% of processors.
Apple silicon
Instruction sets
NEON, AES, SHA1, SHA2, SHA3, SM3, SM4, BF16, AMX, SME
This processor supports NEON, AES, SHA1, SHA2, SHA3, SM3, SM4, BF16, AMX, SME instruction sets, which is broader support than 54.1% of processors and equal to that of 0.1% of processors.
includes Apple Matrix extensions
Show more
N. of physical cores
12
Market range: <2 – >12
This processor has 12 CPU cores, which is more than 79.9% of processors and equal to 5.7% of processors.
CPU threads
12
Market range: <4 – >24
This processor offers 12 CPU threads, which is more than 53% of processors and equal to 14.2% of processors.
CPU boost clock speed
3.5 GHz
Market range: <3 GHz – >5.5 GHz
This processor reaches a boost clock of 3.5 GHz which is lower than that of 81.5% of processors and equal to that of 2.9% of processors.
CPU base clock speed
8x 3.49 GHz & 4x 2.42 GHz
This processor has a base clock of 8x3.49 GHz & 4x2.42 GHz which is higher than that of 90.2% of processors.
PassMark multi-core score
26,697
Market range: <2.5k – >32.5k
This processor scores 26,697 in PassMark, which is higher than 82.2% of processors.
Show more
What reviewers say
Semiconductor size
5 nm
Market range: <4 nm – >24 nm
This processor uses a 5 nm process node, which is more advanced than that of 83.5% of processors and equal to that of 3.2% of processors.
Foundry
TSMC 5 nm
This processor is built on the TSMC 5 nm foundry process, which is more advanced than that of 83.1% of processors and equal to that of 3.2% of processors.
L3 cache
?
L2 cache
?
L1 cache
3,300 KB
Market range: <128 KB – >1.2k KB
This processor has an L1 cache of 3,300 KB which is larger than that of 98.6% of processors and equal to that of 0.1% of processors.
Show more
DDR memory version
LPDDR5
This processor supports DDR LPDDR5, which is newer than that of 87.8% of processors and equal to that of 0.9% of processors.
Maximum memory speed
6,400 MHz
Market range: <1.5k MHz – >6.5k MHz
This processor supports memory speeds up to 6,400 MHz, which is higher than that of 82.6% of processors and equal to 8% of processors.
Max memory speed (JEDEC)
LPDDR5-6400 MHz
This processor supports JEDEC memory speeds up to LPDDR5-6400 MHz, which is higher than that of 83.6% of processors and equal to 2.9% of processors.
Max memory speed (XMP / EXPO)
N/A
Maximum memory capacity
32 GB
Market range: <32 GB – >256 GB
This processor supports up to 32 GB of memory, which is less than 73% of processors and equal to 18.9% of processors.
Show more
What reviewers say
Integrated graphics
yes
This processor includes integrated graphics. 14.7% of processors offer this.
Integrated GPU model
Apple 19-core GPU
This processor uses the Apple 19-core GPU integrated GPU, which is more advanced than that in 99.3% of processors.
Integrated GPU execution units
19
Market range: <6 – >64
This processor has 19 GPU execution units, which is fewer than 56% of processors.
Integrated GPU base frequency
444 MHz
Market range: <300 MHz – >800 MHz
This processor has an integrated GPU clock of 444 MHz which is higher than that of 76.9% of processors and equal to that of 0.6% of processors.
Integrated media encoders/decoders
H.264 (HW decode/encode), H.265 (HW decode/encode), VP9 (HW decode), ProRes (HW decode/encode), ProRes RAW (HW decode/encode)
This processor supports H.264 (HW decode/encode), H.265 (HW decode/encode), VP9 (HW decode), ProRes (HW decode/encode), ProRes RAW (HW decode/encode) media codecs, which is broader support than 99.5% of processors and equal to 0.2% of processors.
Show more
TDP (Thermal design power)
30 W
Market range: <15 W – >90 W
This processor has a TDP of 30 W which is lower than that of 67.5% of processors and equal to that of 0.3% of processors.
Base power (PL1)
?
Boost power (PL2)
N/A
Tau (power duration limit)
N/A
Configurable TDP
no
This processor does not support configurable TDP. 53.7% of processors offer this.
Show more

Apple M2 Pro 12-core CPU 19-core GPU vs the average processor

246810TotalPlatformPerformanceArchitectureMemory & PCIeIntegrated graphicsPower & Thermal
  • 2.78x higher multi-core score
    This processor has a higher Geekbench 6 multi-core score than the average processor (14,459 vs 5,209). The average processor scores 5,209 in Geekbench 6 multi-core.
    14,459 vs 5,209
  • 2.33x higher PassMark score
    This processor has a higher PassMark benchmark score than the average processor (26,697 vs 11,469). The average processor scores 11,469 in PassMark benchmark.
    26,697 vs 11,469
  • 59.9% better single-core performance
    This processor has a higher PassMark single-core score than the average processor (4,091 vs 2,558). The average processor scores 2,558 in PassMark single-core.
    4,091 vs 2,558
  • 73% higher single-core score
    This processor has a higher Geekbench 6 single-core score than the average processor (2,656 vs 1,535). The average processor scores 1,535 in Geekbench 6 single-core.
    2,656 vs 1,535
  • 6 more CPU cores
    This processor has more CPU cores than the average processor (12 vs 6). The average processor has 6 CPU cores.
    12 vs 6
  • Higher base clock
    This processor has a higher base clock than the average processor (8x3.49 GHz & 4x2.42 GHz vs 4x3.4 GHz).
    8x3.49 GHz & 4x2.42 GHz vs 4x3.4 GHz
  • 4.26x higher memory bandwidth
    This processor has a higher memory bandwidth than the average processor (200 GB/s vs 46.9 GB/s). The average processor offers memory bandwidth of 46.9 GB/s.
    200 GB/s vs 46.9 GB/s
  • 8.59x larger L1 cache
    This processor has a higher L1 cache than the average processor (3,300 KB vs 384 KB). The average processor has L1 cache of 384 KB.
    3,300 KB vs 384 KB
  • 26.9% higher review score
    Reviews score
    8.5/ 10
    ✕
    What it is
    Average grade from independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers, 1–10.
    How we count it
    Grades: Each review's own score is converted to 1–10; without one, we grade the review ourselves. Big test sites count more, short reviews half as much as full tests. A video review counts half.
    Score: The average grade is 80% of the review mark; the number of reviews is the other 20% (1 review = 5, the typical number in this category = 8, the most-reviewed model = 10).
    Enough data: With few reviews, the average grade is pulled toward the typical grade of this category. No reviews yet: 7.2 for now.
    Share: Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
    Score distribution
    â–¼
    <55-66-77-88-99-10
    ★ Better than 92% of models

    80%

    8.4

    Average grade

    20%

    8.6

    Popularity

    Grades by review (9)
    1 review, with a printed score. 8 video reviews, each counting half as much as a written test. Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
    User ratings collected online are not part of this score.
    8.5 vs 6.7
  • More extensive crypto acceleration
    This processor offers more extensive crypto acceleration than the average processor (AES, SHA, RSA/PKA vs AES, SHA).
    AES, SHA, RSA/PKA vs AES, SHA
  • Supports heterogeneous scheduling
    This processor uses heterogeneous multi-processing, while the average processor does not. 24.8% of processors use it.
  • 3 years newer release date
    This processor has a newer release date than the average processor (2023 vs 2020).
    January 2023
    2023 vs 2020
  • 2.78x higher multi-core score
    This processor has a higher Geekbench 6 multi-core score than the average processor (14,459 vs 5,209). The average processor scores 5,209 in Geekbench 6 multi-core.
    14,459 vs 5,209
  • 2.33x higher PassMark score
    This processor has a higher PassMark benchmark score than the average processor (26,697 vs 11,469). The average processor scores 11,469 in PassMark benchmark.
    26,697 vs 11,469
  • 59.9% better single-core performance
    This processor has a higher PassMark single-core score than the average processor (4,091 vs 2,558). The average processor scores 2,558 in PassMark single-core.
    4,091 vs 2,558
  • 73% higher single-core score
    This processor has a higher Geekbench 6 single-core score than the average processor (2,656 vs 1,535). The average processor scores 1,535 in Geekbench 6 single-core.
    2,656 vs 1,535
  • 6 more CPU cores
    This processor has more CPU cores than the average processor (12 vs 6). The average processor has 6 CPU cores.
    12 vs 6
  • Higher base clock
    This processor has a higher base clock than the average processor (8x3.49 GHz & 4x2.42 GHz vs 4x3.4 GHz).
    8x3.49 GHz & 4x2.42 GHz vs 4x3.4 GHz
  • 4 more CPU threads
    This processor has more CPU threads than the average processor (12 vs 8). The average processor has 8 CPU threads.
    12 vs 8
  • 4 wider front-end design
    This processor has a higher front-end width than the average processor (8 vs 4). The average processor uses front-end width of 4.
    8 vs 4
  • 8.59x larger L1 cache
    This processor has a higher L1 cache than the average processor (3,300 KB vs 384 KB). The average processor has L1 cache of 384 KB.
    3,300 KB vs 384 KB
  • 58.3% smaller process node
    This processor has a lower process node than the average processor (5 nm vs 12 nm). The average processor uses a process node of 12 nm.
    5 nm vs 12 nm
  • Mixed big and small cores
    This processor uses a big.LITTLE design, while the average processor does not. 22.6% of processors use one.
    performance + efficiency cores
  • 8.08x more transistors
    This processor has more transistors than the average processor (40 billion vs 4.95 billion). The average processor has 4.95 billion transistors.
    40 billion vs 4.95 billion
  • More advanced foundry
    This processor uses a more advanced foundry process than the average processor (TSMC 5 nm vs Intel 14 nm).
    TSMC 5 nm vs Intel 14 nm
  • 8.1% more L3 per core
    This processor has more L3 cache per core than the average processor (2 MB/core vs 1.85 MB/core). The average processor provides 1.85 MB/core of L3 cache per core.
    2 MB/core vs 1.85 MB/core
  • 4.26x higher memory bandwidth
    This processor has a higher memory bandwidth than the average processor (200 GB/s vs 46.9 GB/s). The average processor offers memory bandwidth of 46.9 GB/s.
    200 GB/s vs 46.9 GB/s
  • Newer DDR support
    This processor supports a newer DDR generation than the average processor (LPDDR5 vs DDR4).
    LPDDR5 vs DDR4
  • 2x higher memory speed
    This processor has a higher maximum memory speed than the average processor (6,400 MHz vs 3,200 MHz). The average processor supports memory speed of 3,200 MHz.
    6,400 MHz vs 3,200 MHz
  • Higher JEDEC memory speed
    This processor has a higher JEDEC memory speed than the average processor (LPDDR5-6400 MHz vs DDR4-3200 MHz). The average processor supports JEDEC memory speed of DDR4-3200 MHz.
    LPDDR5-6,400 MHz vs DDR4-3,200 MHz
  • Better integrated GPU
    This processor uses a better integrated GPU than the average processor (Apple 19-core GPU vs Intel UHD Graphics 630).
    Apple 19-core GPU vs Intel UHD Graphics 630
  • 33.3% lower TDP
    This processor has a lower TDP than the average processor (30 W vs 45 W). The average processor has a TDP of 45 W.
    30 W vs 45 W
  • Less advanced microarchitecture
    This processor uses a less advanced microarchitecture than the average processor (Avalanche / Blizzard vs Kaby Lake).
    Avalanche / Blizzard vs Kaby Lake
  • 20.5% lower boost clock
    This processor has a lower boost clock speed than the average processor (3.5 GHz vs 4.4 GHz). The average processor reaches boost clock speed of 4.4 GHz.
    3.5 GHz vs 4.4 GHz
  • No configurable TDP
    This processor does not support configurable TDP, while the average processor does. 53.7% of processors support configurable TDP.
  • Weaker security extensions
    This processor provides less advanced security extensions than the average processor (Secure Enclave, PAC, KIP vs AES-NI, NX bit, Secure Key, TXT, OS Guard, Boot Guard, CET, MBEC, TME, TME-MK).
    Secure Enclave, PAC, KIP vs AES-NI, NX bit, Secure Key, TXT, OS Guard, Boot Guard, CET, MBEC, TME, TME-MK
  • No simultaneous multithreading
    This processor does not support simultaneous multithreading, while the average processor does. 73.8% of processors support it.
  • Less advanced architecture
    This processor uses a less advanced architecture than the average processor (ARM64 vs x86-64).
    Apple silicon
    ARM64 vs x86-64
  • 38.4% larger die size
    This processor has a higher die size than the average processor (245 mm² vs 177 mm²). The average processor has a die size of 177 mm².
    245 mm² vs 177 mm²
  • 8.44x more expensive
    Apple M2 Pro 12-core CPU 19-core GPU is more expensive than the average processor (£2,110 vs £250).
    £2,110 vs £250
  • 8.44x more expensive
    Apple M2 Pro 12-core CPU 19-core GPU is more expensive than the average processor (£2,110 vs £250).
    £2,110 vs £250
  • 28% worse value for money
    Apple M2 Pro 12-core CPU 19-core GPU has worse value for money than the average processor (5.69 vs 7.3).
    5.69 vs 7.29
  • Weaker security extensions
    This processor provides less advanced security extensions than the average processor (Secure Enclave, PAC, KIP vs AES-NI, NX bit, Secure Key, TXT, OS Guard, Boot Guard, CET, MBEC, TME, TME-MK).
    Secure Enclave, PAC, KIP vs AES-NI, NX bit, Secure Key, TXT, OS Guard, Boot Guard, CET, MBEC, TME, TME-MK
  • Less advanced architecture
    This processor uses a less advanced architecture than the average processor (ARM64 vs x86-64).
    Apple silicon
    ARM64 vs x86-64
  • Narrower instruction support
    This processor supports a narrower instruction set than the average processor (NEON, AES, SHA1, SHA2, SHA3, SM3, SM4, BF16, AMX, SME vs MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES, SHA, AMD-V).
    includes Apple Matrix extensions
    NEON, AES, SHA1, SHA2, SHA3, SM3, SM4, BF16, AMX, SME vs MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES, SHA, AMD-V
  • 20.5% lower boost clock
    This processor has a lower boost clock speed than the average processor (3.5 GHz vs 4.4 GHz). The average processor reaches boost clock speed of 4.4 GHz.
    3.5 GHz vs 4.4 GHz
  • No simultaneous multithreading
    This processor does not support simultaneous multithreading, while the average processor does. 73.8% of processors support it.
  • No speed boosting
    This processor does not support automatic speed boosting, while the average processor does. 87.7% of processors offer this.
  • Less advanced microarchitecture
    This processor uses a less advanced microarchitecture than the average processor (Avalanche / Blizzard vs Kaby Lake).
    Avalanche / Blizzard vs Kaby Lake
  • 38.4% larger die size
    This processor has a higher die size than the average processor (245 mm² vs 177 mm²). The average processor has a die size of 177 mm².
    245 mm² vs 177 mm²
  • 50% less memory capacity
    This processor has fewer maximum memory capacity than the average processor (32 GB vs 64 GB). The average processor supports 64 GB of memory.
    32 GB vs 64 GB
  • 2 fewer memory channels
    This processor has fewer memory channels than the average processor (4 vs 2). The average processor supports 2 memory channels.
    4 vs 2
  • No configurable TDP
    This processor does not support configurable TDP, while the average processor does. 53.7% of processors support configurable TDP.

Video reviews

Hands-on testing, unboxing, and real-world video evaluations

9.5
Dion Schuddeboom
≈ estimated
04/02/2023
Hands-on review · performance, battery, webcam and longevity
Verdict
Apple M2 Pro 12-core CPU 19-core GPU is one of the best all-round laptops available, though M1 Pro owners have only modest reasons to upgrade.
9.0
AppleInsider
≈ estimated
03/02/2023
Hands-on review · benchmarks, thermal and SSD tests
Verdict
Apple M2 Pro 12-core CPU 19-core GPU performs strongly for most buyers, but skip the base model and don't upgrade from M1 Pro.
9.0
EMKWAN REVIEWS
≈ estimated
23/01/2023
Hands-on review · benchmarks, thermals and battery tests
Verdict
Apple M2 Pro 12-core CPU 19-core GPU is a solid machine worth buying, though M1 Pro owners don't need to upgrade.

Expert reviews

In-depth analysis and verdict from leading tech publications

8.6
cnet.com
✓ explicit
09/02/2023
Hands-on test · Pro laptop
Verdict
The 16-inch MacBook Pro with M2 Pro is a modest refresh, worth considering if you skipped Apple Silicon, but 2021 owners can skip it.

Third-party reviews

What customers like about Apple M2 Pro 12-core CPU 19-core GPU

  • Exceptional multi-core performance for professional tasks like 4K video editing and music production
  • Outstanding power efficiency leading to industry-leading battery life (often 15+ hours of light use)
  • Significant 20-30% graphics performance boost over the previous M1 Pro generation
  • Runs remarkably cool and quiet even under sustained professional workloads
  • Improved media engine speeds up transcoding and rendering times
  • Future-proof connectivity with support for Wi-Fi 6E, Bluetooth 5.3, and HDMI 2.1 (8K output)

What customers don't like about Apple M2 Pro 12-core CPU 19-core GPU

  • High entry price point makes it a significant investment for non-professional users
  • Incremental upgrade for owners already using an M1 Pro-based machine
  • Unified memory (RAM) and SSD storage cannot be upgraded after purchase
  • GPU performance is notably lower (roughly 60-70%) compared to the M2 Max variant
  • Base 512GB models have been reported to have slower SSD speeds than previous generations
  • Limited gaming library optimization despite the powerful hardware

Verdict

The Apple M2 Pro, built on a second-generation 5nm process, features a 12-core CPU—comprising 8 performance cores reaching up to 3.5GHz and 4 efficiency cores—alongside a powerful 19-core GPU and a 16-core Neural Engine. This SoC delivers a 200GB/s unified memory bandwidth, supporting up to 32GB of LPDDR5-6400 RAM, and includes dedicated media engines for hardware-accelerated ProRes and HEVC video processing. Its primary advantages include industry-leading performance-per-watt, exceptional multi-threaded performance that is up to 20% faster than the M1 Pro, and the ability to support external 8K displays. However, it is limited by its non-upgradable soldered memory capped at 32GB, and users requiring more intensive graphical performance may find it lacking compared to the M2 Max, which offers double the GPU cores and memory bandwidth.

Compare Apple M2 Pro 12-core CPU 19-core GPU with other processors

1Product to compare no. 1
VS
2Product to compare no. 2
VS
3Product to compare no. 3 (optional)

Graphic comparison of Apple M2 Pro 12-core CPU 19-core GPU and other processors

No results found