Apple's rumored M7 Ultra targets 1.5TB of memory and Blackwell-class AI performance 11%

By Luke James31%

7/13/2026, 12:02:52 PM

BS Summary: This article contains 19 faulty reasoning types, including Confirmation Bias, Overconfidence Bias, and Ambiguity (Equivocation), with Appeal to Authority as the most egregious example at 40.3% saturation with 222 hits. Analysis detected 806 faulty-reasoning hits from 551 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 28.2% and a BS Rank of 11% (18,853 of 21,180 articles). This article is better (less manipulative) than 89.00% of the article peer group.

Apple's planned M7 Ultra chip is being designed to support up to 1.5 TB of unified memory and to push AI performance toward the class of Nvidia's Blackwell accelerators, according to a new Bloomberg report published by Mark Gurman. 
But whether the lofty top memory config can ship at all will depend on the state of the memory market, and the part isn't expected until 2028. 
The same report says Apple has compressed its Mac silicon timeline, taping out the M7 roughly six months after the M6. 
Go deeper with TH Premium: CPU 
(Image credit: Tom's Hardware) CPU scaling with DLSS 
Ryzen to the top: How AMD innovated in the gaming CPU market 
How ARM is working its way into PCs 
AMD CES 2026 gaming trends press Q&A roundtable transcript 
We've already heard that Apple plans to release a base M6 chip this fall for entry-level Macs, then skip the Pro, Max, and Ultra versions of that generation and move straight to the M7 line. 
However, Gurman now reckons that we'll see a base M7 in the first half of 2027, M7 Pro and M7 Max at the end of 2027, and the M7 Ultra in 2028. 
Apple reportedly began taping out the M7 about six months after it started the same process for the M6, which is what has enabled the company to pull the schedule forward. 
Apple's rumored M-series roadmap Chip 
Rumored timing 
Reported details 
M6 (base) 
Fall 2026 
Entry-level Macs only; Pro/Max/Ultra skipped this generation 
M7 (base) 
H1 2027 
Taped out roughly six months after M6 
M7 Pro / M7 Max 
End of 2027 
N/A 
M7 Ultra 
2028 
AI performance "closer to" Nvidia Blackwell-class accelerators; up to 1.5TB memory (~2x the M5 Ultra's planned capacity), supply-dependent 
M8 (Soko) 
By 2028 
Built on a 1.4nm process; further AI gains 
Cardinal 
2028 generation 
High-end Macs 
The 1.5 TB target for the M7 Ultra is roughly twice the capacity Apple has planned for the M5 Ultra, per Gurman, who tied the configuration directly to memory availability. 
Apple already pulled the 128GB Mac Studio this year over supply constraints as DRAM prices climbed, and a 1.5 TB part would call for far more of the same scarce, high-cost memory. 
Apple's current M3 Ultra already reaches 819 GB/s of memory bandwidth by fusing two Max dies, and it's the Ultra tier, not the base chips, that carries the heaviest local-AI workloads. 
Gurman describes the M7 Ultra as a large step up in AI performance rather than stated parity with Nvidia's data-center silicon. 
"I'm told the processor dramatically upgrades AI performance, bringing it closer to the class of dedicated AI accelerators such as Nvidia Corp.'s Blackwell," Gurman wrote in his report. 
Apple is also preparing an AI server built on the M5 Ultra under the code name J246 for deployment soon, with a second server chip based on the M7 Ultra planned for 2029, according to the report. 
The 2028 generation, which includes an M8 chip code-named Soko and a high-end Mac part called Cardinal, moves to a 1.4nm process. 
That aligns with TSMC's A14 node , which the foundry has scheduled for mass production in the second half of 2028. 
None of the dates or specifications have been confirmed by Apple. 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 19.6%Luke James: 4.4%Tom's Hardware: 3.7%Confirmation Bias19.6%This article: 3.3%Luke James: 2.4%Tom's Hardware: 2.2%Anchoring Bias3.3%This article: 3.8%Luke James: 4.2%Tom's Hardware: 3.3%Availability Heuristic3.8%This article: 5.3%Luke James: 0.8%Tom's Hardware: 1.1%Representativeness Heuristic5.3%This article: 0.0%Luke James: 0.2%Tom's Hardware: 0.5%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 12.5%Luke James: 1.9%Tom's Hardware: 3.5%Overconfidence Bias12.5%This article: 2.2%Luke James: 6.3%Tom's Hardware: 9.5%Framing Effect2.2%This article: 5.8%Luke James: 0.4%Tom's Hardware: 1.0%Loss Aversion5.8%This article: 5.8%Luke James: 0.8%Tom's Hardware: 0.7%Status Quo Bias5.8%This article: 0.0%Luke James: 0.9%Tom's Hardware: 0.3%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 1.5%Luke James: 4.5%Tom's Hardware: 6.0%Optimism Bias1.5%This article: 4.9%Luke James: 1.7%Tom's Hardware: 1.7%Pessimism Bias4.9%This article: 0.0%Luke James: 5.8%Tom's Hardware: 6.3%Negativity Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Luke James: 2.3%Tom's Hardware: 1.3%Self-Serving Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Luke James: 0.6%Tom's Hardware: 0.6%Fundamental Attribution Error0.0%This article: 0.0%Luke James: 0.0%Tom's Hardware: 0.2%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Luke James: 0.0%Tom's Hardware: 0.5%In-Group Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Luke James: 0.0%Tom's Hardware: 0.2%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 7.8%Luke James: 1.7%Tom's Hardware: 2.9%Halo Effect7.8%This article: 0.0%Luke James: 0.0%Tom's Hardware: 0.0%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Luke James: 0.0%Tom's Hardware: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 6.4%Luke James: 2.5%Tom's Hardware: 1.9%Recency Bias6.4%This article: 0.0%Luke James: 0.8%Tom's Hardware: 0.6%Primacy Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Luke James: 0.0%Tom's Hardware: 0.1%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Luke James: 0.0%Tom's Hardware: 0.2%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%Luke James: 0.1%Tom's Hardware: 0.1%Straw Man0.0%This article: 40.3%Luke James: 6.4%Tom's Hardware: 5.1%Appeal to Authority40.3%This article: 0.0%Luke James: 0.9%Tom's Hardware: 2.0%False Dilemma0.0%This article: 0.0%Luke James: 0.2%Tom's Hardware: 0.8%Slippery Slope0.0%This article: 0.0%Luke James: 0.1%Tom's Hardware: 0.1%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 0.0%Luke James: 4.0%Tom's Hardware: 5.7%Hasty Generalization0.0%This article: 0.0%Luke James: 0.4%Tom's Hardware: 0.2%Red Herring0.0%This article: 0.0%Luke James: 0.6%Tom's Hardware: 1.0%Bandwagon0.0%This article: 0.0%Luke James: 1.1%Tom's Hardware: 3.0%Appeal to Emotion0.0%This article: 1.5%Luke James: 0.8%Tom's Hardware: 0.8%Begging the Question1.5%This article: 5.6%Luke James: 2.7%Tom's Hardware: 3.4%Post Hoc (False Cause)5.6%This article: 0.0%Luke James: 0.0%Tom's Hardware: 0.1%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 0.0%Luke James: 0.8%Tom's Hardware: 0.7%Burden of Proof0.0%This article: 0.0%Luke James: 0.1%Tom's Hardware: 0.3%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 5.6%Luke James: 0.6%Tom's Hardware: 0.5%Composition/Division5.6%This article: 0.0%Luke James: 1.0%Tom's Hardware: 1.7%Anecdotal0.0%This article: 0.0%Luke James: 0.0%Tom's Hardware: 0.0%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 8.3%Luke James: 1.9%Tom's Hardware: 3.4%Ambiguity (Equivocation)8.3%This article: 0.0%Luke James: 0.0%Tom's Hardware: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Luke James: 0.1%Tom's Hardware: 0.2%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%Luke James: 0.0%Tom's Hardware: 0.0%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Luke James: 0.1%Tom's Hardware: 0.2%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Luke James: 0.0%Tom's Hardware: 0.1%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 5.1%Luke James: 4.3%Tom's Hardware: 2.1%Unattributed Quote5.1%This article: 0.0%Luke James: 0.7%Tom's Hardware: 0.9%Quote-first Misdirection0.0%This article: 0.0%Luke James: 2.8%Tom's Hardware: 7.1%Biased Writer Voice0.0%This article: 0.0%Luke James: 0.3%Tom's Hardware: 1.3%Indoctrination0.0%This article: 0.0%Luke James: 0.0%Tom's Hardware: 0.1%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Luke James: 0.0%Tom's Hardware: 0.0%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 1.1%Luke James: 0.9%Tom's Hardware: 3.4%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…1.1%

551 words analyzed.

Speakers

2speakers12%attributed speech483writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Writer's voice • 12 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 39 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 27 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 21 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 6 words • 100.0% coverageTom's Hardware • 8 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 12 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 8 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 9 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 35 words • 0.0% coverageMark Gurman • 32 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 31 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 5 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 2 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 2 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 2 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 2 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 7 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 2 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 2 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 7 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 5 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 3 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 1 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 2 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 1 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 18 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 2 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 2 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 8 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 1 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 2 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 2 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 30 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 32 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 31 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 21 words • 0.0% coverageMark Gurman • 28 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 37 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 22 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 21 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 11 words • 0.0% coverage
Selected voice

Mark Gurman

100%flagged-word coverage
60 attributed words88% of attributed speech85% writer coverage
0%25.0%50.0%Unattributed Quote+46.7 ptsWriter: 0.0%Mark Gurman: 46.7%46.7%Attempt to Sell a Product -1.2 ptsWriter: 1.2%Mark Gurman: 0.0%0.0%

Attribution is sentence-level. Pattern percentages are calculated only from words assigned to that voice.

Loading…
Loading…
Loading…
Loading…

Analysis

Hover over highlighted words in the article to view the associated bias or fallacy analysis.