People seem to be under the mistaken impression that supporting higher memory capacities is hard. It's not. It's trivial. The only reason the M1 doesn't is because of how it's packaged, and they only chose to package it that way because the products they were intending to replace it with only need 2 memory chips. They did what made sense for the M1, and they will do what makes sense for the M1x.
Do we have perf counters that show how memory starved is M1 under pressure?
Granted you'll feel bad if this leak is wrong and Apple shows an M1x with more than 16GB of RAM.
From my experience with both, I think you might be very unhappy in retrospect if you bet that more RAM is going to make the most recent Intel one come within shouting distance of even an 8GB M1 Mini. The old one was one of the best for single-core performance within its generation, but they're not even the same thing, not even close. Again, I own both machines with the Intel Mini maxed out as far as it can go with RAM.
My gut level reaction is, you could give the new one lots more RAM (in theory) and it wouldn't end up using it. So they're capping them, otherwise people will assume there's a benefit and that the 8GB and 16GB ones aren't workable for heavy processing.
I've also got a suspicion (possibly just a weird cynicism) that this is why the previous-gen Mac Pro runs so huge and expensive: they've overpriced and overdesigned it so hard that it's unattainable for nearly anybody, making it a sort of status object with Veblen pricing, specifically to avoid class action lawsuits when they release newer machines that outperform it at a tenth of the price.
You were never supposed to actually buy the monstro cheese grater Mac Pro or its screen with the thousand dollar stand, and if you did, (a) it's of symbolic value to you and (b) it's your own fault. When the real high performance computer comes out of Apple it'll be at Mac Mini prices, and meant to iPhone-ify desktop computing as a category.
They just started the Apple Silicon transition. A bit early for the doom and gloom, no?
I started computing in the days when you could add your own instructions to your computer. I’m not suing anyone though that capability is no longer available
http://users.telenet.be/kim1-6502/6502/2ksa/2ksa.html
Cover:Schematics for a 5V, 3A regulated power supply and a 1K x 8 read/write memory block. The power supply and three such memory blocks can be added to the basic KIM-l microcomputer to provide the 4K RAM required by this assembler. Parts are available from Jameco Electronics.
It was a pleasant shock. I ended up returning it as it turns out I really do need at least 32GB of RAM, but it was VERY difficult to take it back.
Even if this rumor is way overhyped, I still can't wait for a MBP that can take at least 32GB of RAM. I'll be there with bells on!
Definitely glad other people are having a better experience.