If a mini works for you, why do you need a Studio?
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Mac Studio Speculation [Merged]
- Thread starter darkus
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
At a guess, @Giuanniello just needs a desktop computer that has sufficient performance, but also doesn't want to buy a machine that is 2 generations old (M2 Pro Mini) or have to buy a product that is already half way through the refresh cycle (M4 Max Studio, if released in H2 2025). I'm assuming the refresh cycles for Mx Pro and Max will be 12-18 months.
Buying a machine with a generation-"n" SoC (e.g. M4 Max) when generation-"n+1" (M5 Max) could be only 3-4 months away feels like one is buying "old stuff for the new price" and maybe reducing the overall supported life of the product. I know that this is somewhat emotional rather than strictly logical, but there is a definite "lost opportunity" in buying a version of any product just before the next version is released. Either you could have had the benefit of the latest version if it had been released 6 months earlier, or will feel you have missed out if you buy version "n" knowing that if you waited "a few months", you could have had an improved version "n+1".
Of course, if version "n" is substantially cheaper than "n+1" then there are some good deals to be had, but you don't find those until after version "n+1" has been released.
You can also take the view that buying a new machine that has a SoC that is "6 months old" will not be very significant if you keep the machine for more than about 3 years.
I'm in the market for a Mac Studio with Mx Max, but will wait to see how the M4 Pro and M4 Max perform when they are released (presumably in the MBP several months before the Studio). If the M4 Max is a lot better than the M2 Max, I will probably wait until the release of the M4 Max Studio. If it's less inspiring I might look for a deal on an M2 Max Studio, new or used. If the M4 Pro Mini is also released, I will assess whether it is close to enough to an M2 Max Studio to meet my needs.
hi everybody,
the buyersguide for the current mac studio just went from caution to do not buy.
what do you think ? is there something coming ?
best regards,
schnitzel
the buyersguide for the current mac studio just went from caution to do not buy.
what do you think ? is there something coming ?
best regards,
schnitzel
Last edited:
I assume it’s just based off of time since release and not because of anything pending
same here !
and if there is also no mini i "might" opt for an MBP.
but: apple will lose "then" 2K on me.
Cause otherwise: i´d buy a lower spec MB and a M4 studio. Both
But if no news vs. the studio is in sight end oktober, and no Mini in sight as well whne the MBP hits, then the MBP will have to be the powerfull one.
Screw it, then i buy only one fresh mac, instead of two.
TL;DR:
and if their base specs or upgrade margins would have been different, i had probably bought two new macs allready the past 18 months. But whenever i wanted to pull the trigger. Within reasonable price range, the specs were to little.
And when i had the specs, the price was just not worth that product.
i can buy such an overpriced Mac. but only when i *really* need one.
Can do it all two years. even once a year if necessary ( then lower speced)
BUT: no modern mac desktop in sight !
Edit: i NEED IT NOW !
idiots !
#single customer / no weight on the market vs. apple
Idiots !
Yes i DO need the power. SC speed that is.
Edit: i DO NEED IT NOW !
Idiots !
This is very funny post
Anyway, I've been waiting for raytracing AS mac for a while so I really hope that the studio will come in fall. If not then I'll just get the mini and will just get the studio with M5 or so.
I'm really not going to support Apple with their nonsense MBP notebooks when the prosumers need the power first.
Thank god that I have a spare work computer that is fast otherwise I would probably switch to windows on my personal machine.
So frustrating how the product pipeline is so messy.
iPad Pro with M4 - amazing but where is the M4 for those that actually NEED the power?
Stupidity
Anyway, I've been waiting for raytracing AS mac for a while so I really hope that the studio will come in fall. If not then I'll just get the mini and will just get the studio with M5 or so.
I'm really not going to support Apple with their nonsense MBP notebooks when the prosumers need the power first.
Thank god that I have a spare work computer that is fast otherwise I would probably switch to windows on my personal machine.
So frustrating how the product pipeline is so messy.
iPad Pro with M4 - amazing but where is the M4 for those that actually NEED the power?
Stupidity
same here !
and if there is also no mini i "might" opt for an MBP.
but: apple will lose "then" 2K on me.
Cause otherwise: i´d buy a lower spec MB and a M4 studio. Both
But if no news vs. the studio is in sight end oktober, and no Mini in sight as well whne the MBP hits, then the MBP will have to be the powerfull one.
Screw it, then i buy only one fresh mac, instead of two.
TL;DR:
and if their base specs or upgrade margins would have been different, i had probably bought two new macs allready the past 18 months. But whenever i wanted to pull the trigger. Within reasonable price range, the specs were to little.
And when i had the specs, the price was just not worth that product.
i can buy such an overpriced Mac. but only when i *really* need one.
Can do it all two years. even once a year if necessary ( then lower speced)
BUT: no modern mac desktop in sight !
Edit: i NEED IT NOW !
idiots !
#single customer / no weight on the market vs. apple
Idiots !
Yes i DO need the power. SC speed that is.
Edit: i DO NEED IT NOW !
Idiots !
Ha! That was my bad (I'm not really great with teh BB forum edit soft)
> give me a good [Markdown](https://www.markdownguide.org/getting-started/) ~~editor~~composer, on the **gripping hand**, and....
Ahgreeb.
I don't really understand the need to regularly update, but--if one has been waiting--either/or/both, will probably bring satisfaction
"Always another wave beginning to rise
More than the minutes of a surfer’s life
Ever a swelling toward the strand
Followed by one more and another...."
Donald Levering, Previous Lives
I really don't understand this dissatisfaction with the upgrade cycle. The M2 MAX can be configured with 38 GPU cores, 128GB RAM and 8TB disk, and if that's not enough the M2 ULTRA is double. I have a base M2 MAX and it runs a VM with Windows 11 and lots of games and I can still run photo editing and other productivity apps in macOS and it never reaches more than 75% memory pressure. I mean, if your workloads are saturating the M2 MAX, get the Ultra. If the Ultra isn't enough, you are literally in the smallest minority of users in the world. M4 Studio, um what's the use case?
The use cases for an M4 Sudio and Pro are 3D rendering, hardware raytracing, 8K video editing, Unreal Engine and Unity programming and rendering, AI, audio production with massive sound libraries and plugins, high end motion graphics and cinematic video walls.
The M2 Ultras you refer to have the CPU and GPU performance of an i9 13900K computer with an RTX 3080.
That’s a $1.5K computer.
Blender - Open Data
Blender Open Data is a platform to collect, display and query the results of hardware and software performance tests - provided by the public.
opendata.blender.org
Last edited:
Could be just "if paying top dollar still doesn't get me the best then I'll save my pennies and settle for 'good enough'".
When I got my M1 Max Studio, there was no M1 Pro Mini option which would have satisfied my needs - if I were buying today I'd be in two minds about whether to get a Studio of a Mini Pro.
However, apart from performance issues - your mileage may vary - I feel that the Studio is all-round a better design, even if it looks boring. The front-mounted USB-C sockets are handy and - if you look at the repair manual that is now available - I think the internal construction is better, with most of the sockets on daughterboards and the SSD on replaceable modules (even if Apple won't sell you upgrades, they can be replaced if they fail). Even having the USB sockets vertical is a little bit nicer esp. if you're plugging in "wider" dongles/adapters.
We're probably not talking about the fully tricked out 12 CPU/19 GPU + 32GB Mini, which costs the same as the 12/30/32GB Studio - but if you can get by with 10 cores and 16GB RAM you save a whopping $700.
The problem is that the M3 Max SoC - which has been in the MBP since October 2023 - offers a significant step up in power c.f. the M2 Max - and would represent the first really worthwhile upgrade for someone with a M1 Max machine. Yet it looks like the Mac Studio & Mini are getting skipped, possibly for no better reason than there's not likely to be a M3 Ultra, and a M3 Ultra Studio would embarrass the M2 Ultra (which depends heavily on apps being able to exploit all of those cores efficiently) - at least on bangs-per-buck... and now the regular M4 is out, so presumably the M4 Pro/Max/Ultra (or their new equivalents) are in the pipeline.
If you desperately need a new Studio today then the existing offerings are OK - but I'm guessing that most people on this thread already have at least a M1 Studio or Mini and are looking towards their next system, which currently looks like its at least 10 months away....
Ah, that makes sense. I would buy the 1.5k computer if I needed that much power.The use cases for an M4 Sudio and Pro are 3D rendering, hardware raytracing, 8K video editing, Unreal Engine and Unity programming and rendering, AI, audio production with massive sound libraries and plugins, high end motion graphics and cinematic video walls.
The M2 Ultras you refer to have the CPU and GPU performance of an i9 13900K computer with an RTX 3080.
That’s a $1.5K computer.
Blender - Open Data
Blender Open Data is a platform to collect, display and query the results of hardware and software performance tests - provided by the public.
Due mostly to Apple’s insane pricing plus never cutting prices on devices that are over a year old. Like for example, the base Mac Studio should not be priced at the same price it launched almost 2 years ago.
Throw in a price cut or better specs if you are keeping the same price, like more ram and storage.
The crazy thing is, we have apple fanatics (not to be confused with customers and fans) whom will defend Apple for such anti consumer designs. I miss the days of the Apple ][, LC’s, desktop Quadras, etc which we were able to easily access and upgrade our computers.
Sadly, that has been Apple’s MO for a long time (overcharging for less capable hardware)
Sometimes i wonder if they really dont want bigger market shares.
These days due to privacy concerns, people want to abandon Windows and jump to Macs, but Apple dont want to offer either expandable system or reasonably priced ones.
The dissatisfaction is not really a question of the capabilities of the current M2 Studios, but rather the fact that Apple is still asking the original release price for tech that has already been surpassed (in many areas) by the M3 Max, and is already a year and a half old (in the case of the M2 Max). It seems highly likely that there will be no M3 Max/Ultra Mac Studio, so potential buyers could be waiting up to another 12 months for an M4 Max/Ultra.
In any case, the M2 Mac Studio should be well passed the half-way point from its launch to the next release, so unless there is a pressing need for one, buyers are in the position of settling for last-generation technology at no discount, or waiting a considerable time for the next-generation - which is likely to be a significant improvement at (probably) the same price.
I understand the oft-repeated advice "buy what you need", but many folks don't have a pressing need, and also want to get best bang-for-the-buck for their eventual purchase, so timing the purchase cycle is important.
Many products (cars, bicycles, phones etc.) tend to get discounts once they are no longer "this year's model", even items that are not on a strictly annual release schedule. Apple doesn't go in for this, although some re-sellers do offer modest discounts.
If Apple reduced the price of the M2 Max Studio by $300-500, I'm sure they would pick up a good number of sales for those who want to buy, but not at the original price given that it's now last-gen hardware.
Last edited:
^ This. 100% agree. It seems unreasonable to charge the same original price for the M2 Max Studio given the existence of a superior M3 Max SoC that could (in theory) be used in a transitional M3 Max Studio. This is unlikely to happen, I know, but it makes an M2 Max Studio a fairly "meh" purchase choice, unless you really need one now.
With the proviso that they'd have to cut prices of the Mac Mini range, too - a BTO 32GB, 12 Core Pro Mini already costs the same as a 32GB Studio Max. Much as I'd like to see a base M2 Mini for < $500 I don't see it happening.
But, really, that would be a case of "who are you and what have you done with the real Tim Cook" - remember the Mac Mini went without upgrades or price cuts between 2014 and 2018, the Mac Pro from 2013-2019 (although ISTR they dropped the base model and shifted the other models down a notch at some point) and the iMac Pro from 2017-2021. Unpleasant truth is that the money is in laptops and mobiles now.
I see no reason for the lack of M3-series Minis and Studios other than low priorities... unless M3 was just a stopgap and we're going to be surprised with M4-series ones in the next few months, in which case you'll thank Apple for not tempting you with a M3 or cheap M2 Studio - but that doesn't seem to be supported by current rumours and they're certainly not going to launch M4-series Studios before M4-series MacBook Pros (aka "the money").
I think the Studio Max is a sore point because the M3 Max seems to be the star of the M3 lineup and a M3 Max Studio would be the first really compelling upgrade from a M1 Max.
Neither AAPL's MO, nor what I expect anyone to expect.
I enjoy the idea of instant, de jour tech (heck: I participate--to a certain degree--in such things).
But, 'true' implies 'tried', and that easily becomes a sober acclimatization
Thats the thing...The use cases for an M4 Sudio and Pro are 3D rendering, hardware raytracing, 8K video editing, Unreal Engine and Unity programming and rendering, AI, audio production with massive sound libraries and plugins, high end motion graphics and cinematic video walls.
The M2 Ultras you refer to have the CPU and GPU performance of an i9 13900K computer with an RTX 3080.
That’s a $1.5K computer.
Blender - Open Data
Blender Open Data is a platform to collect, display and query the results of hardware and software performance tests - provided by the public.
People who say " oh its totally enough power, what you complain".... try to put denoising or anything like a face mask on a 8.3k 60 fps raw video... and than try to export this. If i put high denoise in Davinci Resolve i sit here for 4 days with 99% GPU on a M2 Ultra for a 20 min clip.
I would prefer a M4 Ultra or even Extreme....
Luckily i got my M2 Ultra refurbished to an extreamly good price point. Basically i paid less than on ebay as a used one for the same specs.
Yeah, I hate when others project that something is enough. I fail to understand how come people don't realise that there is never enough power when it comes to computers.
Complex calculations, 3D, science/math calculations, medical models etc. all require as much as you can get and there is (and most likely never will be) enough power for that.
So those that thing something is enough should keep it to themselves and not come here projecting that others are 'whining' for no reason.
If one doesn't understand it then the best way to learn is to be curious and ask instead of saying something is enough etc. when they have no bloody clue.
Dealing with people..... challenging sometimes :-D
Complex calculations, 3D, science/math calculations, medical models etc. all require as much as you can get and there is (and most likely never will be) enough power for that.
So those that thing something is enough should keep it to themselves and not come here projecting that others are 'whining' for no reason.
If one doesn't understand it then the best way to learn is to be curious and ask instead of saying something is enough etc. when they have no bloody clue.
Dealing with people..... challenging sometimes :-D
You make a good point; unless any given computing task is perceived by a human as “instantaneous”, there is always room for improvement.
Whether this matters to you or not is entirely subjective, and varies according to the kind of interaction. In a video game, even a 200 millisecond delay in interaction could be noticeable. For an application user interface waiting more than about 2-3 seconds before you see something happen would become tedious, particularly if is done frequently such moving along a video timeline. For any less frequent task (rendering or stabilizing a clip for example), anything longer than about 10 seconds is going to make most people wish it were faster.
On the flip-side, there are no doubt people who have entirely unrealistic ideas about how much speed they need. There is no point in paying for hardware that that performs an interactive task faster than your reaction time, or is otherwise “overkill”. I find it amusing when people insist they need a 7000MB/s read/write speed on their storage to edit a FHD video that only requires a maximum of 10MB/s bandwidth
Spot on and it is an interesting spot to be.
For example, I saw this video comparing a similarly priced Mac Studio vs a PC and you end up with the dilemma that you go for practicality or desire.
This same dilemma happened with a designer at work, he demanded a Mac, even though, his work would have been done a lot quicker on a PC with a Ngreedia gpu.(This was before Apple moved to Apple Silicon) and sadly for him, the budget didnt allowed his desire.
An interesting thing with the pricing shown in the video, is the cost of Apple's Ram and drive space. With 64 MB RAM, the Mac was $4,000. Adding cores cost $1,000, so the Studio Ultra was then $5,000. Adding 64 MB of extra RAM cost $800. So by then it was the same price as the compact but fast PC. Most PCs & notebooks still offer upgradable RAM. And then one adds $1,000 for an extra 3TB from the stupid 1 TB starting storage - suddenly its $6,800. A PC's upgrade to 4TB would have cost in NVME form $190. A difference of $800. Apple could have had a space for adding some NVME drives. Instead, Apple is greedy - almost laughing at its customers. How can they sell computers with 256 MB of storage, when that storage is not average user upgradable? Their antics are chasing those requiring storage away from Apple. And with Apple one has to also add an external storage solution, which won't be cheap compared to internal drives for a PC.
Sadly for Apple, the hardware comparison from that particular PC price point is even worse, considering that he used a case that falls into the “luxury “ realm, since they are a bit more expensive than others, plus the watercooling components and overpriced GPU (Ngreedia charges almost US$2K for one).
So you end up with a bigger price difference.
And then adding the fact that if you buy such a Mac Studio today (July 2024) you are paying top dollars for parts that are 2 generations behind (taking in consideration the existence of the M4).
But comparing PCs is somewhat unfair anyway. Macs have now become desktop notebooks but without screens. And when one compares an Apple notebook to a PC version, the Apple fairs pretty well. What annoys me about Apple is their lack of true customer focus. For instance they force one to guess on internal drive capacity while their drives cost 3 or 4 times the market rate. But they do not have an upgrade policy, where one could tell Apple to upgrade the internal drive for a similar price to the drive different when on buys the device. That would be simple to do ... or Apple could put a spare slot in their machines. They are no longer customer focused.