Review of Wireless Remote Control Egg and Bullet
 |
| The new Mac Studio is the mid-range standalone desktop figurer that many Apple users have been request for. |
All production photography past DL Cade
Later on many months of speculation and some very authentic leaks, Apple tree finally unveiled the "professional person Mac Mini" that many of u.s.a. have been waiting for. It's about three times thicker and several times more powerful than the Mac mini, and it'due south called the Mac Studio.
Released aslope the M1 Ultra Apple Silicon SOC that sports 20 CPU cores, upward to 64 GPU cores, and upwardly to 128GB of RAM, the Mac Studio is capable of delivering more performance than all but the most expensive Mac Pro configurations. But fifty-fifty if yous don't spend $v,800+ on the maximum spec, this computer is the Mac desktop creatives have been hoping Apple would release for a very long time.
Information technology'due south powerful, information technology's tiny, it's silent, and if y'all've already got a high-quality monitor, keyboard, and mouse at home, it's also an incredible bargain compared to a similarly specced 14- or 16-inch MacBook Pro. A couple of days after terminal week's announcement a Mac Studio and Studio Display made its fashion to the DPReview offices for review, and I've been frantically testing this fiddling computer ever since. Overall, I'm very impressed past what Apple has achieved.
Jump to:
Design, build and usability| Performance benchmarks | Performance takeaways | Conclusion
Fundamental specifications:
 |
| A full "Mac Studio" setup per Apple tree: the Mac Studio ($iii,200), Studio Display ($1,600), a Magic Keyboard ($200), a Magic Trackpad ($150), and a Magic Mouse ($100). |
The Mac Studio comes in two primary flavors, M1 Max or M1 Ultra, each with a few possible configurations. The M1 Max variant tin be configured with either 24 or 32 GPU cores, 32 or 64GB of RAM, and between 512GB and 8TB of storage; the M1 Ultra comes with either 48 or 64 GPU cores, 64 or 128GB of RAM, and between 1TB and 8TB of storage.
We've listed four potential configurations below to give yous a sense of the total range of specs (and price points) available in this same 3.5L aluminum box. If you go along storage the aforementioned and simply upgrade the CPU, GPU, and/or RAM, you can expect to pay anywhere from $two,200 to $5,800 depending on how much power you lot desire to clasp out of this tiny little computer:
| M1 Max 24-core | M1 Max 32-core | M1 Ultra 48-cadre | M1 Ultra 64-core | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CPU | M1 Max 10-core CPU | M1 Max 10-core CPU | M1 Ultra 20-cadre CPU | M1 Ultra 20-cadre CPU |
| GPU | M1 Max 24-core GPU | M1 Max 32-cadre GPU | M1 Ultra 48-core GPU | M1 Ultra 64-core GPU |
| RAM | 32GB Unified Memory | 64GB Unified Memory | 64GB Unified Memory | 128GB Unified Memory |
| Storage | 1TB Integrated NVMe Storage | 1TB Integrated NVMe Storage | 1TB Integrated NVMe Storage | 1TB Integrated NVMe Storage |
| Price | $2,200 | $2,800 | $iv,000 | $5,800 |
The version we're testing today is an M1 Max variant with a 32-core GPU, 64GB of RAM, and 2TB of storage, which brings the total price up to $3,200. When you consider that a sixteen-inch MacBook Pro with identical specs will set you dorsum $4,300, that sounds like a pretty skillful deal, but it depends on whether or non yous already take high quality peripherals at abode.
The Mac Studio doesn't come with a keyboard or mouse, and if you don't have a monitor at home, you'll need one of those too. If you lot add up the cost of all the products Apple sent united states of america for this review – the Mac Studio, a full-sized Magic Keyboard, a Magic Mouse, a Magic Trackpad, and the base-model Studio Display – the toll of our review unit of measurement goes from $iii,200 to a much steeper $5,250. Bump that Mac Studio upwards to an M1 Ultra and you lot could spend another $1,200 - $iii,000 depending on the variant.
If you add up the cost of all the products Apple sent us for this review – the Mac Studio, a keyboard, a mouse, a trackpad, and the base-model Studio Brandish – the cost of our setup goes from $3,200 to a much steeper $v,250.
None of this ways the Mac Studio isn't worth it. Pound for pound, Apple has packed more than performance into this footling device than whatever mini-ITX estimator you could hope to build at habitation. And since most photo and video editors already accept an external display, mouse and keyboard at home, this gets you Apple's near powerful components without charging you for peripherals you already own. But it'southward worth keeping the extra costs in mind if you lot're deciding between the Mac Studio and an equivalent MacBook Pro.
Back to summit
Design, build and usability
 |
| The Mac Studio looks like a tall Mac mini with some front I/O. |
In that location's not a lot to say about the blueprint or build quality of the Mac Studio. Basically, Apple took the CAD blueprint of the Mac mini, extruded it up a couple of inches, and called it a twenty-four hour period. The Mac Studio does include a bit more than aluminum instead of the plastic back plate yous'll discover on the Mac mini, but other than that they're pretty similar when you see them side-by-side.
Overall, I similar this minimalist pattern. And while Apple might have been able to fit the M1 Max into a slightly smaller version with slightly smaller fans, the two big fans and the aluminum (M1 Max) or copper (M1 Ultra) head sink that have up virtually of the 3.5L chassis are and so quiet that I never one time heard them over the hum of my nearby appliances, non even during heavy workloads.
In terms of usability, the slightly larger chassis and much more powerful Apple Silicon did requite Apple the opportunity to make i major design tweak though: they added a bunch of extra ports.
On the back, you get four Thunderbolt 4 ports (40GB/southward), an HDMI two.0 port, two USB Type-A ports (10Gb/s), a ten gigabit ethernet port and a "pro audio" jack that can power high impedance headphones:
 |
| On the dorsum of the device, the Mac Studio features four Thunderbolt 4 ports, a 10 gigabit ethernet port, the power connector, two USB-A ports, an HDMI 2.0 port, and a "pro audio" jack that can drive high-impedance headphones. |
The inclusion of 10 gigabit ethernet as standard is specially noteworthy, because it enables professional photograph and video editors to work on their avails at high speed over the network. That'southward not relevant for boilerplate Joe photo editor, simply for professional photo- and video-editing studios, the ability to put all of your source footage or RAW files on an external NAS and access them at 10 gigabit speeds over the network is a godsend.
The inclusion of 10 gigabit ethernet as standard is particularly noteworthy, because it enables professional photo and video editors to work on their assets at high speed over the network.
And Apple tree didn't terminate with the ports on the back. Breaking with many years of Apple tree pattern tradition, they put extra I/O on the front of the device, where you'll discover ii additional USB Blazon-C (M1 Max) or Thunderbolt four (M1 Ultra) ports and a UHS-2 SDXC carte du jour slot.
Every bit an owner of the M1 Mac mini, I can't limited how happy the front I/O makes me. Not only did they throw in an SD carte slot, which I still use regularly, but I can now accuse my wireless peripherals or plug in an SSD without scratching up the dorsum of the estimator trying to blindly stab a USB-C cable into 1 of the free Thunderbolt ports.
 |
| On the front of the Mac Studio, you get an additional two USB Blazon-C (M1 Max) or Thunderbolt four (M1 Ultra) ports, and a UHS-II SDXC card slot. |
Yes, I wish the HDMI port were 2.one, non 2.0, and information technology would accept been prissy to come across a UHS-3 or SD Express 7.0 card reader – all things we've seen on PCs that nosotros've recently reviewed – just overall this is an excellent complement of ports that has yous covered for 95% of all utilise cases. For the last 5%, you tin always get a Thunderbolt dock.
Other than these two small gripes, in that location's really merely 1 major downside to the Mac Studio's design, and that'southward upgradability...or lack thereof.
This isn't surprising, but it's disappointing still. Given how Apple tree Silicon is laid out I never expected the RAM to exist upgradable, but fifty-fifty a single accessible M.ii slot for storage expandability would have been a massive win in my volume. Alas, it seems that Apple is saving all the expandability for the Mac Pro, and then go on that in mind if you're shopping for a Mac Studio: the configuration you buy is the configuration you're stuck with.
Dorsum to elevation
Operation benchmarks
 |
| Even if you lot opt for the more affordable M1 Max version of the Mac Studio, this niggling computer is capable of incredible photo and video-editing performance. |
The M1 Max Mac Studio that Apple sent over is identical to the M1 Max MacBook Pro 16 that nosotros reviewed in Nov. Apple promised to send an M1 Ultra variant in for testing presently but, in the meantime, nosotros wanted to find out if Apple tree was belongings annihilation back from these chips on the laptop side.
Does the Mac Studio with an M1 Max, 32-core GPU, and 64GB of RAM perform whatever better than an identical 14- or 16-inch MacBook Pro, or is it really just a matter of preference and price? The respond: there is no significant difference. The Mac Studio and 16-inch MacBook Pro posted identical numbers in all of our benchmarks, with simply a few seconds difference hither or there — well within the margin of error for these kinds of tests.
Equally such, for today's comparing we decided to test the M1 Max Mac Studio against three dissimilar computers: a 14-inch MacBook Pro with a 10-core M1 Pro and 32GB of RAM, a Mac mini with a ten-core M1 and 16GB of RAM, and an MSI Creator 17 with an 11th-gen Intel Core i9 CPU, NVIDIA RTX 3080 GPU, and 32GB of RAM. Total specs below:
| M1 Max Mac Studio | M1 Pro 14-inch MacBook Pro | M1 Mac mini | MSI Creator 17 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CPU | M1 Max 10-core CPU | M1 Pro ten-core CPU | M1 8-core CPU | Intel Core i9-11900H |
| GPU | M1 Max 32-cadre GPU | M1 Pro 16-cadre GPU | M1 8-core GPU | NVIDIA RTX 3080 16GB VRAM |
| RAM | 64GB Unified Memory | 32GB Unified Retention | 16GB Unified Retentiveness | 32GB DDR4-3200MHz |
| Storage | 2TB Integrated NVMe Storage | 1TB Integrated NVMe Storage | 2TB Integrated NVMe Storage | 2TB PCIe iv.0 M.2 NVMe SSD |
| Brandish | Northward/A | xiv-inch Retina HDR miniLED Display 100% DCI-P3 | Northward/A | 17-inch 4K HDR miniLED Display 100% DCI-P3 |
| Price | $3,200 | $two,900 | $1,700 | $3,800 |
Nosotros used these four computers to run all of our usual benchmarks on the latest versions of Lightroom Classic, Capture One Pro 22, Photoshop, Premiere Pro, and, for the Apple computers, the latest version of Final Cutting Pro. These numbers should give you a sense of the kind of performance you can expect from this automobile compared to some of Apple's other options, and how the Mac Studio compares to a high-powered 17-inch PC laptop.
These numbers should give yous a sense of the kind of performance you can expect from this machine compared to some of Apple's other options, and how the Mac Studio compares to a high-powered 17-inch PC laptop.
Unfortunately, we don't have a comparable desktop PC in-house that nosotros can examination confronting the Mac Studio, merely we're working on it and hope to take something around to test by the time Apple sends over the M1 Ultra version of the Mac Studio sometime in the next few weeks. The most appropriate comparing would be the beastly Intel NUC 12 Farthermost, then Intel, if yous're reading this, accomplish out and bear witness us what you've got!
We've got an unused RTX 3080 only sitting hither in our studio, waiting for the correct rig.
Adobe Lightroom Classic
For Lightroom Classic, nosotros run two different benchmarks using 100 copies of the studio scene test photo from four different cameras: the Canon EOS R6, the Nikon Z7 Ii, the Sony a7R IV, and the Fujifilm GFX 100. For our get-go benchmark, we test how long information technology takes to import each set of 100 RAW files and generate i:1 previews. For our 2nd benchmark, we apply a custom preset and consign each fix of 100 RAW files as full-size, 100% quality JPEGs.
Generally speaking, Lightroom Archetype import and preview generation tracks raw CPU performance and isn't significantly affected by the amount of RAM or the number of GPU cores. That'south pretty much what we meet hither. The Mac mini with only four functioning cores is the slowest of the bunch, while the other iii computers mail service very similar numbers across the lath. The MSI Creator 17 does manage to pull ahead with a more significant margin in one case we get to the 100MP Fujifilm files, though.
| Canon EOS R6 Import | Nikon Z7 II Import | Sony a7R Iv Import | Fujifilm GFX 100 Import | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mac Studio | i:26 | 2:19 | 2:24 | 6:02 |
| MacBook Pro | one:24 | 2:18 | 2:24 | vi:01 |
| Mac mini | ane:59 | iii:37 | three:53 | 8:57 |
| MSI Creator 17 | ane:23 | ii:17 | 2:32 | v:31 |
For exports, the corporeality and speed of RAM built into your arrangement begins to play a function, allowing the Mac Studio to pull ahead of the pack... just non by much. Both the Mac Studio and MacBook Pro are much faster than the Creator 17 and especially the Mac mini, but the difference between the M1 Max and M1 Pro is much smaller than we expected given that the Mac Studio has twice the RAM.
Information technology goes to prove that your powerful, expensive hardware is really only as good equally the software you lot're using. If the software isn't optimized to take full advantage of extra cores or more GPU power or more RAM, y'all're out of luck:
| Canon EOS R6 Export | Nikon Z7 2 Export | Sony a7R Iv Export | Fujifilm GFX 100 Export | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mac Studio | ii:28 | 5:18 | vi:45 | 11:16 |
| MacBook Pro | 2:33 | 5:29 | 6:51 | 11:39 |
| Mac mini | 4:16 | 9:17 | sixteen:01 | 40:21 |
| MSI Creator 17 | iii:32 | 7:42 | 9:52 | 20:19 |
Capture One Pro 22
To test Capture One Pro operation, we run the exact same import and consign benchmarks as Lightroom Classic, with one exception: previews are generated at the default 2560px, since there is no 1:1 choice. Capture 1 is much faster than Lightroom for both of these tasks, as it relies heavily on the GPU to advance both import and export.
At import, there'due south basically no divergence between the 3 Macs. Whatsoever is happening behind the scenes, Capture 1 isn't taking advantage of the extra RAM , CPU, or GPU horsepower between the M1, M1 Pro, and M1 Max. The MSI Creator 17 pulls ahead here, thanks to its beefy NVIDIA RTX 3080:
| Canon EOS R6 Import | Nikon Z7 2 Import | Sony a7R Four Import | Fujifilm GFX 100 Import | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mac Studio | 00:43 | 1:03 | ane:17 | 2:04 |
| MacBook Pro | 00:42 | 1:03 | 1:17 | 2:03 |
| Mac mini | 00:44 | i:05 | i:18 | two:01 |
| MSI Creator 17 | 00:twoscore | 00:56 | ane:08 | 1:39 |
Finally, when we go to Capture 1 Exports, the extra GPU cores and RAM inside the Mac Studio beginning to generate some noticeable improvements in performance. Combining 64GB of super fast LPDDR5 unified memory with 32 GPU cores allows the M1 Max Mac Studio to pull mode ahead of the other computers, leaving even the MSI Creator 17 in the dust.
The power to consign 100 fully edited 100MP Fujifilm GFX 100 RAW files in just 4 minutes and 30 seconds is pretty impressive if yous ask me:
| Canon EOS R6 Export | Nikon Z7 2 Consign | Sony a7R Four Consign | Fujifilm GFX 100 Export | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mac Studio | 00:57 | 2:07 | two:33 | 4:30 |
| MacBook Pro | 1:11 | 2:52 | 3:32 | six:43 |
| Mac mini | two:06 | 5:22 | six:forty | 12:20 |
| MSI Creator 17 | 1:31 | 3:xiii | 3:55 | 6:23 |
Adobe Photoshop
The final photography benchmark we run is Puget Systems' popular Puget Bench criterion. We run a slightly older version of the benchmark (v0.8) because information technology was the terminal one to include a PhotoMerge test. It'south also a script, non a plugin, which allows us to run it on Apple Silicon Macs without relying on the Intel-based version of Photoshop.
As you can see, the Mac Studio cleans house. Every single score, including the GPU category score, is the highest nosotros've seen. That's particularly impressive when you lot consider that the MSI Creator 17 boasts an RTX 3080 that soaks up 95W of ability at total load and has 16GB of its own VRAM. Information technology's non an apples to apples comparison (pun intended) considering the GPU score is based on tests that rely on more than raw GPU performance, only it'south nevertheless an impressive win for Apple:
| Overall | General | GPU | Filter | PhotoMerge | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mac Studio | 1287.2 | 129.2 | 117.5 | 111.5 | 162.two |
| MacBook Pro | 1218.7 | 124.8 | 108.0 | 100.3 | 159.ane |
| Mac mini | 1035.6 | 103.one | 87.3 | 83.iv | 144.8 |
| MSI Creator 17 | 1030.5 | 111.7 | 113.ane | 85.8 | 120.three |
Adobe Premiere Pro and Concluding Cut Pro
In Adobe Premiere Pro and Final Cut Pro, nosotros use the aforementioned 4K timeline made upward of 8K Sony a1 test footage, complete with color grading and multiple layered effects. The footage is rendered, and then nosotros consign a master file, H.264 file, and HEVC/H.265 file. The target fleck charge per unit is adapted to keep the output identical betwixt the two programs.
Finally, as a last test, we also run Warp Stabilize and Final Cutting's built-in stabilization feature on a 15-2d prune from this aforementioned video shoot.
You lot tin watch the video used in these benchmarks below:
The Mac Studio's Premiere Pro performance is splendid. Ever since Adobe ramped upwards hardware acceleration and released their Apple Silicon optimized version of this app, the return and consign times we've seen from the M1 Pro and M1 Max have been faster than annihilation else we've tested.
And not simply a little faster, we're talking twice every bit fast. Comparing the Mac Studio to the MSI Creator 17, render and export times are 51% faster across the board:
| Render All | Export Master File | Export H.264 | Export HEVC/H.265 | Warp Stabilize | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mac Studio | 1:47 | 00:03 | i:41 | ane:40 | 2:xiii |
| MacBook Pro | 3:04 | 00:12 | ii:57 | iii:01 | 2:13 |
| Mac mini | vii:29 | 00:11 | 8:17 | seven:47 | 2:24 |
| MSI Creator 17 | three:40 | 00:11 | three:26 | 3:25 | ii:32 |
What's more, the Mac Studio is actually faster in Premiere Pro than Terminal Cut Pro. The same footage cut into the aforementioned timeline using (to the extent information technology was possible) identical furnishings is 35% faster to return and 28% faster to export into H.264. The only test where Last Cut was faster is encoding an 8-bit HEVC file, which is 34% faster in Apple's software.
| Render All | Export Master File | Export H.264 | Consign HEVC/H.265 | Concluding Cut Stabilize | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mac Studio | 2:45 | 00:44 | 2:21 | 1:06 | 00:24 |
| MacBook Pro | 3:05 | 00:46 | 3:09 | 1:31 | 00:23 |
| Mac mini | 4:47 | one:22 | 4:19 | ane:54 | 00:24 |
Performance Takeaways
Given that we already reviewed a 16-inch MacBook Pro with identical specs, you might think at that place'southward not much to take away from these results, but I'd beg to differ. Beginning, the very fact that the Mac Studio with an M1 Max and 64GB of RAM performs identically to a xvi-inch MBP with the same specs ways that Apple isn't holding anything dorsum in the laptops. You're not going to sacrifice performance if you choose to become with a MacBook Pro, it's genuinely a thing of preference.
Second, at present that nosotros've been able to compare an M1 Max-powered calculator to the more than affordable M1 Pro, it shows which uses will (and won't) benefit from the more powerful processor, twice the RAM, and twice the graphics cores. For many photographers in detail, an M1 Pro-powered MacBook Pro with 32GB of RAM is going to be more than powerful enough.
For many photographers in particular, an M1 Pro-powered MacBook Pro with 32GB of RAM is going to be more than powerful plenty.
3rd, these numbers point out an intriguing hole in Apple's line-upwardly: in that location is no M1 Pro desktop. For creatives who don't need a laptop and aren't interested in the extra RAM and GPU cores offered by the M1 Max and M1 Ultra, a more affordable Mac Studio with an M1 Pro would exist an incredibly intriguing value proposition that would probably unseat the M1 Mac mini as the best value in the Apple ecosystem. We've got our fingers crossed.
Finally, and information technology has to exist asked. Given the operation higher up, is there any reason to spend the extra $1,200 to $3,000 on an M1 Ultra variant of the Mac Studio other than maybe "future proofing" your investment? There are definitely use-cases that can benefit from twice the GPU cores and twice the RAM – and we will definitely be testing the M1 Ultra only equally soon every bit Apple can get one to us – but for the vast majority of users, anything more powerful (and expensive) than the M1 Max is probably across the point of diminishing returns.
Back to top
The Apple desktop (about) creators have been waiting for
 |
| Apple managed to pack a ton of power into this tiny little computer. |
| What We Like | What We Don't Like |
|---|---|
|
|
Lovers of the iMac will be disappointed that Apple tree seems to accept discontinued the 27-inch iMac in favor of the Mac Studio and Studio Display, but for virtually creatives, I think this is a win. Most of us don't demand a display, keyboard, mouse, speakers, mic, or webcam, simply we might desire the power and performance that comes with a high-cease Apple tree Silicon device. Now, nosotros can get that without paying for all the other stuff.
For $two,200 y'all can buy yourself a Mac Studio with M1 Max, 24-core GPU, 32GB of RAM and 1TB of storage, hook it upward to your existing photo editing setup, and experience ane of the fastest photo- and video-editing rigs that Apple has ever released.
The Mac Studio is precisely the computer that many of utilise were hoping Apple would release: a "professional" Mac desktop with tons of power and lots of ports, that still takes up less room on your desk than a gallon of milk.
I can't requite the Mac Studio 5 stars. The fact that y'all tin can't upgrade any of the components disqualifies it, and Apple left out some nice-to-haves like HDMI 2.1... or a mouse and keyboard. But if you tin can overlook these omissions, the Mac Studio is precisely the computer that many of use were hoping Apple would release: a "professional person" Mac desktop with tons of ability and lots of ports, that all the same takes upward less room on your desk-bound than a gallon of milk.
Back to top
strzeleckihatmarat.blogspot.com
Source: https://www.dpreview.com/news/9294369869/apple-mac-studio-review-the-apple-desktop-we-ve-been-waiting-for