Mac Studio

[hubell]

According to C-net the basic mac studio has GPU power comparable with an a 2500€ windows laptop like Razer Blade 14 ( 3.3GHz AMD Ryzen 5900HX, Nvidia GeForce RTX 3080)
(and not surprising the same speed as the laptop with the same chip; the MacBook Pro, 16-inch, M1 Max)
They have not tested the Ultra version of the Mac Studio yet.

I wonder how this computer deals with real life GPU intensive tasks like Topaz Denoise.
my computer still takes one minute to work on a 45MP file, far too slow.

https://www.cnet.com/tech/computing/apple-mac-studio-review/

I posted this on another board:

"I just purchased a Mac Studio Ultra with 64 GB of RAM and 48 GPU Cores, and ran four files through Gigapixel AI and Sharpen AI with the Mac Studio and my 2013 Mac Pro with 32GB of RAM, 6 Cores and AMD FirePro D300 video for comparison. Two files from an 80MP IQ180 P1 back, and two files from a 50MP Hasselblad X1D. These programs, along with Helicon Focus, have been the most significant bottlenecks in my workflow. (Sharpen AI runs natively on Mac Silicon SOCs, but Gigapixel does not yet.)
I enlarged the files to a width of 46" in Gigapixel AI. The two files from the IQ180 took 42" and 47" to process with the Mac Studio, and 9'13" and 7'25" with the Mac Pro. The two X1D files took 27" and 19" with the Mac Studio, and 4'41" and 4'28" with the Mac Pro. To process 4 previews, the Mac Studio took around 2 seconds, and the the Mac Pro 10"-12".
To apply Sharpen AI as a filter in PS, the two IQ180 files in the Mac Studio took 19" and 20", and the Mac Prp took 3'37" in both cases. With the X1D files, the Mac Studio took 10" and 12", and the Mac Pro took 1'58" and 2'14". A preview with the Mac Studio was almost instantaneous, but took around 5 seconds with the Mac Pro. Testing subtle changes in the applicable settings and sharpening models is now seamless.
At least compared to a 2013 Mac Pro, the performance of the Mac Studio Ultra is just astonishing with these two programs. PS and LR also seem so much faster overall. What I can't say is how a Mac Studio Max would stack up. Is the extra $2k or so worth it If it takes 20" to apply Sharpen AI with the Ultra but 30" with the Max? I don't replace my computers every other year. My 2013 Mac Pro has served me well for 9 years. So, I decided to future proof to some degree by purchasing the Ultra."

I also did some testing with Denoise AI on Hasselblad X1D files and Phase IQ180 files. The former took 8-10 seconds to process, the IQ180 files took around 16 seconds. More importantly, the previews were redone in a second or so when I changed the parameters or the selected area that is louped. 

[kers]

...
I also did some testing with Denoise AI on Hasselblad X1D files and Phase IQ180 files. The former took 8-10 seconds to process, the IQ180 files took around 16 seconds. More importantly, the previews were redone in a second or so when I changed the parameters or the selected area that is louped.

Thanks that is the info i needed... so my graphic card is a factor 5-6  slower...  significant.
 Helicon focus runs very well here ..(i don't do 100 layers).

[ned]

I've had my Mac Studio, low-end configuration for about a week. My work involves dealing with 200MB - 1G large format scans in Photoshop. I'm also running PS via Rosetta 2 since I have some plug-ins that require it. All I can say is the low-end version of the Studio handles these files with ease. Far faster than my i5 based Windows machine I thought was pretty good to begin with.

[kers]

i just came across this:
https://eclecticlight.co/2022/04/18/m1-thunderbolt-ports-dont-fully-support-usb-3-1-gen-2/

it seems that Apple has messed up with the thunderboltports in the sense that they do not work as fast as expected with USB3.1 and USB3.2 connected devices...

Most probably a m1 chip problem. a bad thing for a device that needs external storage as a basis.

In summary:

    USB 3.1 Gen 2 storage connected direct to a Thunderbolt port on an M1 Mac was limited to 5 Gb/s, giving read rates of about 400 MB/s and write rates of about 430 MB/s.
    USB 3.1 Gen 2 storage connected to a USB-C port on the front of a Mac Studio Max using a USB-C cable, or via a USB-C port on a Studio Display, operated at 10 Gb/s, with read and write rates of about 500 and 490 MB/s.
    USB 3.2 storage connected direct to a Thunderbolt port on an M1 Mac operated at 10 Gb/s, with read and write rates of about 910 and 970 MB/s.
    USB 3.1 Gen 2 storage connected to a USB-C port on the front of a Mac Studio Max using a Thunderbolt 4 cable operated at 10 Gb/s, but read and write speeds were lowest of all, at about 20 and 40 MB/s.

[vjbelle]

Pieter..... thanks for the post.  Just amazing that Apple has been silent regarding this as external fast storage is essential for photo/videographers.  I'm on the fence to take delivery of my Studio which should arrive by the end of May.  I can live with my 14" M1 until the smoke clears. 

Victor B.

[armand]

It's been an issue since M1 came to market, unless it's USB4 any other USB type connected to their TB ports will only read at 5 Gbs. A reason why I didn't bother getting the pro version of an external Sandisk SSD. Unfortunately there are very few options of portable fast drives that have a large capacity and use TB or USB4.

[kers]

Pieter..... thanks for the post.  Just amazing that Apple has been silent regarding this as external fast storage is essential for photo/videographers.  I'm on the fence to take delivery of my Studio which should arrive by the end of May.  I can live with my 14" M1 until the smoke clears. 

Victor B.

They can’t blame Intel anymore…
The M2 will be solving some mistakes for sure..(and introduce some new…)
I like the Macstudio-concept, except they can and should add the ability to put your own NVME-ssd in.
I guess that is what an upcoming MacPro is .

[funfoto]

I too am concerned about all the speed issues regarding the USB and Thunderbolt speeds that people are reporting. Question for the more knowledgeable than myself in these matters; do you think the problem is hardware or firmware? I would be inclined to go ahead and take delivery of the Mac Studio if I thought the issue could be resolved with a simple firmware update, but if it's a hardware problem that could only be fixed through a recall, I would cancel my order immediately until it was fixed. Thoughts anyone?

[Chris Kern]

Perhaps I'm missing something, but I don't understand why (1) anyone engaged in imaging production except maybe members of a team that was producing and collaboratively editing massive amounts of commercial-grade video would be particularly concerned about the speed of channel-attached external storage and (2) why anyone or team that actually needed fast channel-attached storage would ever choose USB storage devices over Thunderbolt devices.

[armand]

Perhaps I'm missing something, but I don't understand why (1) anyone engaged in imaging production except maybe members of a team that was producing and collaboratively editing massive amounts of commercial-grade video would be particularly concerned about the speed of channel-attached external storage and (2) why anyone or team that actually needed fast channel-attached storage would ever choose USB storage devices over Thunderbolt devices.

For my side the answers are:
1) I would like to get a small internal drive and use a fast external drive for everything else, where I could have all my stuff (~ 3.5TB photos so far), not for backup
2) there are few external storages that meet the above and ideally are somehow portable, I think the Sabrent one is really the only option above 4TB. Sandisk only has USB SSDs that would be ok if M1 would access them at 10 Gbs but less so at 5 Gbs.

I too am concerned about all the speed issues regarding the USB and Thunderbolt speeds that people are reporting. Question for the more knowledgeable than myself in these matters; do you think the problem is hardware or firmware? I would be inclined to go ahead and take delivery of the Mac Studio if I thought the issue could be resolved with a simple firmware update, but if it's a hardware problem that could only be fixed through a recall, I would cancel my order immediately until it was fixed. Thoughts anyone?

Keep in mind the Studio does have 2 USB-C front ports that can read at 10 Gbs, only the combo TB/USB from the back are limited to 5 Gbs for USB. The problem I think it's hardware, it's been since M1 was first launched, you would think they would have fixed it by now if it was firmware.

[Chris Kern]

1) I would like to get a small internal drive and use a fast external drive for everything else, where I could have all my stuff (~ 3.5TB photos so far), not for backup

I don't know what asset management software you're using, but in my experience with Adobe Lightroom, as long as you maintain the catalog and previews on your local system, storing image files remotely is unlikely to create a performance bottleneck.  I suspect even the lower bandwidth available to access network-attached storage compared to channel-attached devices would be unlikely to be a problem—at least assuming a reasonably fast connection.

2) there are few external storages that meet the above and ideally are somehow portable, I think the Sabrent one is really the only option above 4TB. Sandisk only has USB SSDs that would be ok if M1 would access them at 10 Gbs but less so at 5 Gbs.

I've been quite favorably impressed with the Glyph product line.  Not inexpensive—inevitably, you need to pay for both storage density and the Thunderbolt protocol—but they provide capacities up to 8 TB.  I haven't bothered to research other options, but I'm sure they're out there.

[armand]

The problem that I see with the Glyph is that the 8TB is almost as expensive as an upgrade to the internal 8TB while being cache limited (similar to Sabrent) and slower. It's more appealing to just upgrade to the internal 8TB and use a cheap large external HDD for local backup.

[Daverich]

I’m going to be replacing my 2020 Mini with one of the Studios. The only thing I care about for storage is how fast Photoshop writes to it. Is there some way to test that or does anyone know? My current external drive writes about 1,400 GBS. Would Photoshop write files faster than that if the drive was capable? I could just max out the storage in the Studio and use that as it’s quite a bit faster but there’s no point if Photoshop couldn’t use the extra speed.

[kers]

My photoshop writes about 1500mb/sec at maximum while my sorage can do 2500-7000 mb/sec... so i suspect not.
Hope you saw my post earlier here about the external ports of the max studio...

[Daverich]

My photoshop writes about 1500mb/sec at maximum while my sorage can do 2500-7000 mb/sec... so i suspect not.
Hope you saw my post earlier here about the external ports of the max studio...

Can you tell me how you determined that? I’d like to test that with my current external drive to see if it would be helpful to change to a faster drive when I change computers. If your numbers are accurate I could just keep the one I’m using now. Thanks.

[kers]

i am on a mac..
an app made to see what video you can use...   Blackmagic Disk Speed Test.
i have a Raid-0 of 4 nvme...

Photoshop writes layers and some information so it is slower... (i have compression off always.)

[govindvkumar]

This might help:
https://appleinsider.com/articles/22/03/09/which-upgrades-are-worth-it-for-the-mac-studio?utm_medium=rss

Thanks for sharing this.