Fully loaded Mac Studio costs just $7999, more powerful than similarly priced Mac Pro

Posted:
in macOS edited March 2022
A fully loaded Mac Studio with an M1 Ultra chip runs $7,999, significantly less expensive than a maxed-out Mac Pro was at release -- and notably more powerful.




On Tuesday, Apple took the wraps off of its Mac Studio, an all-new Mac with an all-new form factor that includes the company's most powerful chip yet -- the M1 Ultra.

According to Apple's benchmarks, the M1 Ultra is up to 90% faster than the speediest 16-core PC desktop chip and provides better graphics performance while using much less power.



Comparing the Mac Studio's pricing to the Mac Pro

Despite the massive bump in performance versus the Mac Pro, the Mac Studio hasn't seen a significant bump in price.

A maxed-out Mac Studio with a 20-core CPU, 64-core GPU, 32-core Neural Engine, 128GB of Unified Memory, and an 8TB SSD retails for $7,999.

For users who need a bit less power, a fully loaded M1 Max Mac Studio equipped with the same SSD and memory costs $4,999.

That's much cheaper than a fully loaded Mac Pro was at its release. A user who wanted the top specifications on the desktop Mac Pro would shell out $53,000. The iMac Pro, Apple's most powerful Mac before the Mac Pro was released, retailed for more than $17,000 with top-tier specs.

However, unlike the Mac Pro and iMac Pro, the Mac Studio doesn't come with any peripherals. Users who wish to add in at least a Magic Keyboard and Mouse can expect to pay an extra $300 if they want the silver-and-black accessories. Of course, they could also just use their existing setup.

While the iMac Pro had a built-in display, the maxed-out Mac Pro's $53,000 price tag didn't include a display. That's similar to the Mac Studio. However, the Apple Studio Display, which is designed to complement the Mac Studio, costs $1,599 -- a lot cheaper than the pricier Pro Display XDR.

A hint at things to come

Although stacking the Mac Pro against the Mac Studio isn't a perfect one-to-one comparison, it helps to put the latter device in context. That's especially true when you account for performance gains.

Mac Studio CPU comparison
Mac Studio CPU comparison


The Mac Studio with an M1 Max chip is up to 50% faster than a 16-core Mac Pro. A Mac Studio model equipped with Apple's new M1 Ultra is up to 90% faster than the 16-core Mac Pro, and up to 60% faster than a 28-core Mac Pro.

Apple's event benchmarks are, of course, weighted in the company's favor. Still, the gains go to show just how significant Apple's performance gains have been with Apple Silicon -- and how it can pass on the savings of using in-house chips to its customers.

Mac Studio versus Mac Pro CPU comparison
Mac Studio versus Mac Pro CPU comparison


It's also interesting because it might hint at what Apple has in store for its next Mac Pro refresh -- the last device in Apple's Mac lineup to get the Apple Silicon treatment. Although we don't know how much it will cost, we can assume that it'll be more powerful than the Mac Studio.

For the best deals on every configuration, be sure to visit our Mac Studio Price Guide.

Read on AppleInsider

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 15
    indieshackindieshack Posts: 333member
    Only with Apple could we see a banner headline “…Costs just $7999”
    macplusplus
  • Reply 2 of 15
    sflocalsflocal Posts: 6,110member
    Only with Apple could we see a banner headline “…Costs just $7999”
    Okay Einstein.  Price an Intel-equivalent and get back to us.

    This is the problem with trolls like you.  You do zero research on the competition yet pretend you know what you're talking about.
    rob53JWSCtdknoxwatto_cobra
  • Reply 3 of 15
    crowleycrowley Posts: 10,453member
    sflocal said:
    Only with Apple could we see a banner headline “…Costs just $7999”
    Okay Einstein.  Price an Intel-equivalent and get back to us.

    This is the problem with trolls like you.  You do zero research on the competition yet pretend you know what you're talking about.
    It's a joke, tight pants.
    grandact73
  • Reply 4 of 15
    rob53rob53 Posts: 3,271member
    crowley said:
    sflocal said:
    Only with Apple could we see a banner headline “…Costs just $7999”
    Okay Einstein.  Price an Intel-equivalent and get back to us.

    This is the problem with trolls like you.  You do zero research on the competition yet pretend you know what you're talking about.
    It's a joke, tight pants.
    Call it what you want but comments like indie's aren't worth spit.

    As for the fully loaded Studio for $7999, that's actually an amazing price for what you're getting. Sflocal is correct, try and build a desktop using Intel, AMD or ARM and you'll have to spend several times this amount. Try and build one that fits into 219 cubic inches and you'll never do it. The cooling system would take twice that amount of space and it still wouldn't be able to cool an over-clocked CPU. It also wouldn't be able to process anything at the speed of the M1 Ultra. Professionals don't have to wait for a Mac Pro replacement, it's already here. Just add external storage arrays (a nice NVMe RAID over Thunderbolt 3) and a 10Gb network switch with access to your servers and you won't have a second to nap because almost everything is happening real time.
    Fidonet127tdknoxwatto_cobra
  • Reply 5 of 15
    ciacia Posts: 262member
    rob53 said:
    crowley said:
    sflocal said:
    Only with Apple could we see a banner headline “…Costs just $7999”
    Okay Einstein.  Price an Intel-equivalent and get back to us.

    This is the problem with trolls like you.  You do zero research on the competition yet pretend you know what you're talking about.
    It's a joke, tight pants.
    Call it what you want but comments like indie's aren't worth spit.

    As for the fully loaded Studio for $7999, that's actually an amazing price for what you're getting. Sflocal is correct, try and build a desktop using Intel, AMD or ARM and you'll have to spend several times this amount. Try and build one that fits into 219 cubic inches and you'll never do it. The cooling system would take twice that amount of space and it still wouldn't be able to cool an over-clocked CPU. It also wouldn't be able to process anything at the speed of the M1 Ultra. Professionals don't have to wait for a Mac Pro replacement, it's already here. Just add external storage arrays (a nice NVMe RAID over Thunderbolt 3) and a 10Gb network switch with access to your servers and you won't have a second to nap because almost everything is happening real time.
    It's still very expensive for a lot of people.
    grandact73
  • Reply 6 of 15
    radarthekatradarthekat Posts: 3,876moderator
    Only with Apple could we see a banner headline “…Costs just $7999”
    Let’s see, a Tesla Model Y costs around $53k.  So imagine a banner headline that reads,

    New Tesla Model Y, costs just $7999

    Yeah, that would be meaningful in my view. 
    Fidonet127watto_cobra
  • Reply 7 of 15
    opinionopinion Posts: 105member
    My god, is this from Apple? It’s the ugliest thing I’ve seen in a long time. Where are you heading Apple?
  • Reply 8 of 15
    Fidonet127Fidonet127 Posts: 521member
    Apple updated the SE and iPad Air which are the consumer stuff and complain about a pro computer being expensive? The Studio beats the Mac Pro and is cheaper. Yes this is more expensive than many can afford, however this is for Pros and Apple neglected that area for a long time. Let the pros have their computers. They have done the ROI calculations and can write it off. 
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 9 of 15
    I cant find it stated anywhere - but I assume the SSD is NVMe???
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 10 of 15
    DetnatorDetnator Posts: 287member
    cia said:
    rob53 said:
    crowley said:
    sflocal said:
    Only with Apple could we see a banner headline “…Costs just $7999”
    Okay Einstein.  Price an Intel-equivalent and get back to us.

    This is the problem with trolls like you.  You do zero research on the competition yet pretend you know what you're talking about.
    It's a joke, tight pants.
    Call it what you want but comments like indie's aren't worth spit.

    As for the fully loaded Studio for $7999, that's actually an amazing price for what you're getting. Sflocal is correct, try and build a desktop using Intel, AMD or ARM and you'll have to spend several times this amount. Try and build one that fits into 219 cubic inches and you'll never do it. The cooling system would take twice that amount of space and it still wouldn't be able to cool an over-clocked CPU. It also wouldn't be able to process anything at the speed of the M1 Ultra. Professionals don't have to wait for a Mac Pro replacement, it's already here. Just add external storage arrays (a nice NVMe RAID over Thunderbolt 3) and a 10Gb network switch with access to your servers and you won't have a second to nap because almost everything is happening real time.
    It's still very expensive for a lot of people.
    It's not intended for most people. Not even remotely.
    tdknoxmartinxyzwatto_cobra
  • Reply 11 of 15
    Plus a minimum of $1600 for the matching screen and you have a computer that is over $10,000 with tax included. This to replace a 27" iMac that fully loaded is around $4000.
  • Reply 12 of 15
    Detnator said:
    cia said:
    rob53 said:
    crowley said:
    sflocal said:
    Only with Apple could we see a banner headline “…Costs just $7999”
    Okay Einstein.  Price an Intel-equivalent and get back to us.

    This is the problem with trolls like you.  You do zero research on the competition yet pretend you know what you're talking about.
    It's a joke, tight pants.
    Call it what you want but comments like indie's aren't worth spit.

    As for the fully loaded Studio for $7999, that's actually an amazing price for what you're getting. Sflocal is correct, try and build a desktop using Intel, AMD or ARM and you'll have to spend several times this amount. Try and build one that fits into 219 cubic inches and you'll never do it. The cooling system would take twice that amount of space and it still wouldn't be able to cool an over-clocked CPU. It also wouldn't be able to process anything at the speed of the M1 Ultra. Professionals don't have to wait for a Mac Pro replacement, it's already here. Just add external storage arrays (a nice NVMe RAID over Thunderbolt 3) and a 10Gb network switch with access to your servers and you won't have a second to nap because almost everything is happening real time.
    It's still very expensive for a lot of people.
    It's not intended for most people. Not even remotely.
    Exactly. It has 10Gb ethernet and it has the word "Studio" in its name. That's where it's destined.
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 13 of 15
    The problem with this "more powerful" claim is, as with anything relating to computing, it depends on the workload.
    Another thing to consider is that giant leaps in graphics tech happen every few years.

    With a Mac Pro (or equivalent PC workstation), you get the ability to extend the life of your machine and upgrade your graphics if / when that happens, and even with Intel based Mac Minis, you could do that with eGPUs...but now that discreet gfx is not a thing anymore on ARM based MacOS, you're stuck with the graphics you get at the time of purchase, and if your needs change down the line, you're essentially forced to get a new machine.

    That is going to be the sticking point, for me, and if you're truly doing an honest to goodness cost assessment, the lifespan of the machine and future modular upgradeability has to be factored in.

    Another factor should also be repairability.  The Mac Studios don't even have user replaceable power supplies, like the Intel Minis did.  

    That's absolutely insane, especially if you're getting the maxed out model.  

    A PSU is a $150 part, and while it is rare, they can die, and having a $150 part be the absolute death of a $8000 computer is just mind bogglingly stupid.

    edited March 2022
  • Reply 14 of 15
    DetnatorDetnator Posts: 287member
    srgnick said:
    The problem with this "more powerful" claim is, as with anything relating to computing, it depends on the workload.
    Another thing to consider is that giant leaps in graphics tech happen every few years.

    With a Mac Pro (or equivalent PC workstation), you get the ability to extend the life of your machine and upgrade your graphics if / when that happens, and even with Intel based Mac Minis, you could do that with eGPUs...but now that discreet gfx is not a thing anymore on ARM based MacOS, you're stuck with the graphics you get at the time of purchase, and if your needs change down the line, you're essentially forced to get a new machine.

    That is going to be the sticking point, for me, and if you're truly doing an honest to goodness cost assessment, the lifespan of the machine and future modular upgradeability has to be factored in.

    Another factor should also be repairability.  The Mac Studios don't even have user replaceable power supplies, like the Intel Minis did.  

    That's absolutely insane, especially if you're getting the maxed out model.  

    A PSU is a $150 part, and while it is rare, they can die, and having a $150 part be the absolute death of a $8000 computer is just mind bogglingly stupid.

    Umm... yeah... no.  What's mind bogglingly stupid is buying an $8000 Mac and not spending another $60 per year on it for AppleCare+, which covers everything that could possibly go wrong with it, indefinitely (including accidents). For anyone who thinks they shouldn't have to pay an extra $60 per year for the value that comes with that, shouldn't be buying a Mac in the first place. Apple products are not for you.

    Regarding the lack of upgradeability.  As has been said thousands of times before on this forum and elsewhere, the vast majority of Apple users do not want to be bothered with upgrading their Macs. It's just not a big enough use case. The few people who do, are not Apple's target market, and the rest of Apple's customers are grateful that Apple will not compromise all the other benefits that come with packaging everything into the chip, etc., for the sake of the tinkerers.  One of the primary reasons for the extraordinary performance of these machines, compared with Intel machines, is that packaging.

    If you want to upgrade your Mac, here's what you do:  
    • Step 1: Back it up.
    • Step 2: Reset it back to factory settings.
    • Step 3: Sell it on eBay, etc. for a very good price (Macs hold their value), or trade it in to Apple, for likely not as good a price, but still reasonable and zero effort.
    • Step 4: Buy a new one with the specs you want, using the money you made from the sale, plus the money you would have spent on the upgrade.
    • Step 5: Run the Migration Assistant during set up of the new Mac to have the new Mac be a perfect mirror of your previous one.
    • Step 6: Get back to work.

    That's the process. That's how you upgrade a Mac. Just because the process is different (to upgrading a PC by pulling one part at a time out and putting replacement parts in) doesn't invalidate said process. In fact the reverse is true. Macs are not PCs. PCs are a collection of parts that more or less work together. Macs are complete optimized black box units that work extremely well (including the OS) because of all the integration.

    Most Mac users prefer Macs BECAUSE of those points, not despite them.  For anyone who disagrees -- who considers those points to be negatives rather than positives -- then the question is: "If it defies your particular needs, preferences, desires, etc., then why do you want a Mac?"


    edited March 2022
  • Reply 15 of 15
    mattinozmattinoz Posts: 2,390member
    cia said:
    rob53 said:
    crowley said:
    sflocal said:
    Only with Apple could we see a banner headline “…Costs just $7999”
    Okay Einstein.  Price an Intel-equivalent and get back to us.

    This is the problem with trolls like you.  You do zero research on the competition yet pretend you know what you're talking about.
    It's a joke, tight pants.
    Call it what you want but comments like indie's aren't worth spit.

    As for the fully loaded Studio for $7999, that's actually an amazing price for what you're getting. Sflocal is correct, try and build a desktop using Intel, AMD or ARM and you'll have to spend several times this amount. Try and build one that fits into 219 cubic inches and you'll never do it. The cooling system would take twice that amount of space and it still wouldn't be able to cool an over-clocked CPU. It also wouldn't be able to process anything at the speed of the M1 Ultra. Professionals don't have to wait for a Mac Pro replacement, it's already here. Just add external storage arrays (a nice NVMe RAID over Thunderbolt 3) and a 10Gb network switch with access to your servers and you won't have a second to nap because almost everything is happening real time.
    It's still very expensive for a lot of people.
    Sure but very overpowered for most of those people as well. I'm sure most people who have value add work that would demand such a beast also have billings to pay for it or at least potential revenue they can risk the pay back on. 

    Still, drop storage back to 2Tb and GPU cores back to 48 and that price drops to 2/3s or you need the space but your apps won't get value from the ultra a fully loaded Max is $4,999. 

    these are pro machines you buy what gets the invoices paid. 

    Detnator
Sign In or Register to comment.