Mac Studio question

[Rob Reiter]

Looking to trade up from an iMac Pro to a Mac Studio. What configuration should I be looking at for a solid Photoshop/Lightroom tool working with Nikon Z8 RAW files and PSD files up to typically 1 Gb or so?

[kers]

Don't know your position, butt I would wait for the M4 to be in it. ( less than a year from now)
Since AI is the big thing the M4 will be focussed on that and AI-driven programs like LR- noise reduction are the most intensive- therefore time consuming tasks nowadays.
I also have a kind of iMacpro and it handles photosop and large files already really well.

[mcbroomf]

I'd take a look at ArtIsRight's website for some photo specific LRC and PS tests for various spec'd Studios and Macbook Pros (they use the same hardware so can be compared with like specs).  Click on the Video tab and the posts will be date ordered though the most recent videos still have some of his older machines tested with relatively up to date Mac OS and Adobe revs.  I'd either ignore or take his recommendations at the end with a pinch of salt though, and use the data graphs of tests that are interesting and pertinent for you.

Apple appear to be skipping an M3 version of the Studio.  Tech sites have pointed to the M3 Max not having the connector on the side to allow it to be paired up for an Ultra version, so it's either an M2 if you need it now or wait for an M4.  M2 Max vs M2 Ultra gets you a lot more CPU and GPU cores which are good for multi core tasks.

For memory I'd suggest you look at your memory pressure on your existing iMac Pro while running heavy workloads with all usual programs websites etc open.  As an example I have some very large PS files (20 GB or more) and occasionally max out my 64GB desktop with LRC, PS and a ton of Chrome tabs open.  Topaz would have taken space as well although I use Adobe Denoise now.

I stick with a 1TB drive for programs only.  All else on external drives.

[Eric Brody]

I'm in somewhat the same position as Rob Reiter. I have a tricked out 2020 i9 iMac with 4TB SSD storage, 64GB of RAM. I store my images on a RAID 5 OWC Thunderbay. I've asked whether an M2 ULTRA will be worth the serious money it would cost vs what I have and have answers all over the map.

Based on kers and other posts on various fora, I'll probably await the M4 since it's obvious there will not be an M3 ULTRA Studio, though I'm a bit older and am "burnin' daylight" by waiting. I also wonder about ongoing support for Intel machines but anyone who knows can't/won't tell and the rest is all rumor.

I'm an amateur and usually not in a hurry. Even denoise in Lightroom doesn't take all that long currently.

[MDL_SD]

I am using an M1 Max MacBook Pro with 64GB RAM that was purchased when the M1 devices came onto the market (the max that you could buy when I purchased my laptop).  It still does well even with current versions of LightRoom, PhotoShop and the Topaz programs.  At the time I bought it the Adobe software was not particularly well aligned to take advantage of multiple cores.  I have not followed the situation since I am currently not shopping for a replacement.  However, I would dig for testing that compares the impact of core number on photo processing performance.  It is not clear to me that an ultra is that valuable for processing still images, but as I say, I have not stayed up on the current state. 

[Chris Kern]

For memory I'd suggest you look at your memory pressure on your existing iMac Pro while running heavy workloads with all usual programs websites etc open.

Does anyone except the Apple engineering staff have a clue as to how this composite metric is calculated?  It doesn't provide me with any useful information.

I spent quite a few years monitoring and tuning the performance of UNIX servers and desktops—MacOS is a variant of UNIX—and it was clear that this operating system will efficiently use all the primary memory you can throw at it.

And since Apple's ARM architecture (1) shares primary memory among its computational subsystems and (2) isn't field upgradeable, I think it's prudent to max out the RAM on any of the current Apple hardware products.

[langier]

A year ago, I went from a maxed-out and upgraded MacPro, vintage 2009, and got a MacStudio M1 base model with 64G & 2TB. I couldn't be happier other than within a couple of weeks the Mac
Studio went to the M2 when Apple upgraded it.

You can always wait for the vapor-ware "next year" or buy what you need from what's available.

I work with multiple-layer Z7 II files, stitched panos from the same and now focus stacking. The M1 seems to take whatever I throw at it although sometimes I need to back-off since I don't need to do a focus stack much over a couple of dozen images most of the time.

I picked my configuration as it was double the ram & HD space of my MacPro. The memory is more efficient with the M-series chips so it functions as though there's even more ram though I haven't hit the wall yet. I've added an external SSD for my working files and seldom have to wait for saves unless I get into the situation where I've got to use the PSB format and that's not too often.

Overall, I'm set for a few years and it's a nice upgrade over the MacPro in many ways especially booting, opening, processing, and saving files.

Coming from an iMac Pro, I don't think you would be disappointed in the current M2 Studio models. Though a 32GB/1TB would be good enough, it's just nice to have the extra resources available to make the system useable for a few more years than just the starter model.

I considered the dual-chip model but there was little need for the extra horse power from everything I read in running Photoshop.

When the M4 comes out, I'll sit back and see what it may bring to the game, otherwise I think I'm good for a few years. My MacPro got me nearly 14 years and I'll bet my M1 gets me at least half that if not more.

[budjames]

I own a MacStudio M1 Max 64GB RAM and 2TB SSD as my office computer. I also own a MacStudio M2 Ultra 128GB RAM and 4TB SSD. These replaced a first generation iMac Pro. Both of these computers rock.

The MacStudio M2 is my photography workstation running the public beta of Sequoia. Lightroom Classic is my image editing app of choice (I moved back to Adobe after a 6 year stint with Capture One Pro). I have this connected to two 27" Eizo Color Edge precision monitors. This set up is amazing. I love the form factor of the MacStudio. It runs cool and quiet. I never hear the fan running. I should be able to get at least five years out of system before needing to upgrading the hardware.

I agree with another poster that with the M4 chips coming later this year, you might want to wait or at least take advantage of price cuts on the M2 models.

Regards,
Bud James

Please check out my fine art and travel photography at www.budjames.photography.

[Rob Reiter]

Thanks to all for your advice. Since my maxed out iMac Pro is working fine, I’ll wait to see what the M4 brings to the Studio in another year.

[Kit-V]

I find myself in a similar situation with a 2017 iMac 27 that is clearly showing its age. But like Eric Body, I too am "burning daylight" at my age. (Or as a friend quipped: "I don't buy green bananas anymore"). I process only still images (no video). The vast majority of my work is done in Lightroom Classic with occasional forays in to Photoshop & Topaz Photo AI. From all of the reviews that I have read, the M2 chip in the Mac Studio would seem to be able to handle my work quite capably with some extra headroom (even with the increased use of AI). Would the M4 chip be faster & more efficient? Quite likely. But the question that I ask myself is: "Will I really need the extra "horsepower" of the M4 when it becomes available & in the next few years"?

[digitaldog]

For 24MP raws, my M1 MacBook Pro* (64gigs of RAM) is very fast in Adobe Camera Raw, Lightroom Classic, and Photoshop. Do I have want bumps for an M4? Sure. But I see no reason at this point, if I upgrade, it will be late next year for an M5. Not that I need that much more speed, but as Macs get older and older, support for newer OSs becomes more necessary with newer hardware to support it. My old 2019 MacBook Pro, which uses an Intel chip, is being used by my wife, and it will not support the next major OS as far as I've seen. So by next year, a new MBP for me, she gets the M1, which should hold us for a while. You can probably get great deals on older than M4 products, I suspect unless you're really pushing much larger images, that will work quite well for you.
*MBP Pro 16" 2022 M1 Max/32-Core GPU | 16-Core Neural Engine/64GB