because most people don't need to turn their macs on and off very often? Can't remember the last time I turned mine off.
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 Reviews: Faster Than a $13,000 Mac Pro
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Same with my Windows PC. This is 2022 and modern computers have low power sleep functions
Look at the verge video review. It does just that
Good review.
I was referring more to detailed test/reviews that go into real world use for content creation in apps like Davince Resolve/Fusion etc.
Patiently waiting for the Mac with HDMI 2.1 🙁
They’re not sponsored but yes you are correct. It’s like that with any YouTube creator with early access to a product. GPU’s on the PC side are a great example.
Ya, iJustine has like 7M subscribers, so I can believe that.
I agree completely! I was curious to see what direction Apple was going to go in with workstation-level m1s. Surprising no one, they are going to the super-integrated, non-upgradable route. For high-end studios, having something upgradable and customizable for different use cases is more important than small form factors, or quiet fans.
The design priority of M1 is low TDP, which doesn't really matter on workstations. Combine that with Apple not supporting Vulkan or OpenGL, means that for CG production the Mac Studio and M1 desktops in general are non-starters.
With the advent of real-time rendering engines, its possible within a short time period that TV shows and feature films will be able to be rendered on the workstations themselves, and be less reliant on render farms. That is the direction the industry is headed using nVidia and AMD tech. Apple, for the most part, is ignoring this. The ideal use-case for the Mac Studio seems to be for video content creators/videographers/photographers.
It's been a while since the Mac felt like the correct platform for creating CG content. The m1 series doesn't change that equation at all, and feels like it moves even further away from the direction that industry is headed to.
But there are more sales for Macbook Airs that people like to use at Starbucks, so it's almost certainly not a focus anymore for Apple.
These are not sponsored. Like, they would legally have to disclose this if it was. That's why a ton of negative reviews on the (received early) stuff around the monitors. Of course, after an update, I suspect the monitors will be great for what they are.
For me, that's not really a good thing.. I mean, unless we treat everything as services...
I'm not saying it's a good thing, but Apple finally released what everyone wanted, and then there was a ton of negativity. It allows for more headlines, and then an update allows for more.
in six months time. "New studio display, actually the monitor to get!" There verge, I just wrote the headline for you. But I agree, this might be the first apple silicon based product where it's a first gen thing that does need some tweaking. Personally, when I'm ready to buy another desktop (probably end of this year or early next) I'll still be looking at the display, since it's just like my iMac's but external (which is what I've been wanting for years).
I don't think people would care that much if they didn't add a camera to it. To me, camera technology gets better faster than a monitor actually dies out.
Test in a professional music production studio in LA or NY throw Avid Pro Tools on there with over 100 channels and see how each machine loaded does in various production scenarios. Use a Carbon Audio Interface to give each system access to HDX aware plugins.
Start pushing the systems. The problem with the test in the end will be the fact you can keep expanding the Mac Pro while the Studio hits a ceiling and it will very quickly.
The Mac Pro can have less cores and with one card run circles around the Studio because it can leverage HDX cards much faster than even what Thunderbolt will provide due to the direct PCI bus access.
www.avid.com
The Mac Pro allows one to throw in 3 or more HDX PCI cards, each with absurd capabilities.
Each one of these cards is the cost of the Studio and well worth it because it does it all. And anyone producing music in the industry is going to load up on hardware that is expandable across Ethernet and more.
If Apple could produce a Mac Pro replacement to date they would do so, but then again most of the audio industry is is no hurry to move to ARM.
Start pushing the systems. The problem with the test in the end will be the fact you can keep expanding the Mac Pro while the Studio hits a ceiling and it will very quickly.
The Mac Pro can have less cores and with one card run circles around the Studio because it can leverage HDX cards much faster than even what Thunderbolt will provide due to the direct PCI bus access.
DSP Audio System for Music and Post - Pro Tools | HDX
Experience the pinnacle of audio production with Avid Pro Tools HDX. Achieve studio-quality sound and unparalleled performance in your projects.
The Mac Pro allows one to throw in 3 or more HDX PCI cards, each with absurd capabilities.
Each one of these cards is the cost of the Studio and well worth it because it does it all. And anyone producing music in the industry is going to load up on hardware that is expandable across Ethernet and more.
If Apple could produce a Mac Pro replacement to date they would do so, but then again most of the audio industry is is no hurry to move to ARM.
They can produce a Mac Pro replacement, I mean, they’ve done it a few times before.
But my question is what market niche will they leave out this time? If the number of Mac Pro’s loaded with 3 HDX cards number in the hundreds (and, like you say, those folks don’t want an ARM system of ANY kind, anyway), then I don’t see this year’s Mac Pro being required to support that use case.I disagree on this one. These day's, energy bills are rising quite high. Energy is expensive. And in the world we live in today, i think Apple created a awesome processor that is capable to do a lot of calculations vs the energy it needs. I calculated that if i replace my workstation for a mac mini M1 16gb, i save 100$ a year on the energy bill. Me alone. And i am not a heavy weight. If you compare this to a heavy workstation, with a 3090, and a hugry intel chip.. i think you can double or tripple the energy saving a year compared with a Mac Studio that pulls..what? ..90 watt max?
I think in this momentum.. where everey free spot on earth recives a ugly windmill.. we do need to look at strong cpu's that sips energy. IF Apple can do this with ARM, the rest can do it too.
My 2 cents
Maybe it can vacuum too, but optional HESPA filter is gonna cost you….
To be fair AutoDesk is just being lame. If Nemetschek group can optimize to Metal and AS, there’s no reason why AutoDesk can do it too.
ijustine is so cringy that i think make apple seems like a bad company.
I think there are greater polluters out there and larger energy use cases that eclipse the M1 user base.I disagree on this one. These day's, energy bills are rising quite high. Energy is expensive. And in the world we live in today, i think Apple created a awesome processor that is capable to do a lot of calculations vs the energy it needs. I calculated that if i replace my workstation for a mac mini M1 16gb, i save 100$ a year on the energy bill. Me alone. And i am not a heavy weight. If you compare this to a heavy workstation, with a 3090, and a hugry intel chip.. i think you can double or tripple the energy saving a year compared with a Mac Studio that pulls..what? ..90 watt max?
I think in this momentum.. where everey free spot on earth recives a ugly windmill.. we do need to look at strong cpu's that sips energy. IF Apple can do this with ARM, the rest can do it too.
My 2 cents