MP 7,1 I'm really trying to switch to Mac Studio from Mac Pro, but it's tough...

[rondocap]

I really, really like the Mac Pro 7.1. (And going all the way back to the Powermac G5, I have a deep passion for these big "Macs" that sometimes can border on the unreasonable - but that's the Mac Pro for you!)

My workflow is basically video editing with Final Cut, using R3D raw - which is traditionally very GPU intensive and benefits from the W6800x Duo that's in my machine. I also rely on moderate hard drive space for backups and working, and I like them to be fast if I'm using it to edit or move around files.

In my opinion and after various real world tests, the Mac Studio with M2 Ultra finally gets close enough that I'd consider using it for my workflow. Sure, the 28 Core gets beat, but the W6800x Duo GPU is still on average a bit faster for R3D than the M2 Ultra, but it's pretty close now.

I am *never* getting rid of my 7.1 Intel Mac Pro - let me make that clear. I know that if I did, I would just be looking for one in 5 years to have around for "Nostalgia" - even if it's slower. That's the unreasonable side, I have fun with hardware. (I write for Pcworld and Macworld too - so I like tinkering with lots of hardware!)

At the same time, I like to use for my workflow the fastest technology that I can, even if the 7.1 Mac Pro sits idly by looking pretty.

The Mac Studio certainly feels fast in everyday use - just opening up browsers and things like that. Is it night and day vs the Mac Pro? No, the Mac Pro still feel fast too - it feels just slightly faster on the Studio, a minor benefit.

It's certainly quiet - and very small. Fits neatly on my desk, but I don't mind the Mac Pro size, and in fact, the sheer beauty of the design wins over any concerns I'd have with moving it around occasionally. (It's very heavy with the hardware inside)

Right now, here's what is *inside* the Mac Pro aside from the W6800x Duo:

1. Pegasus R4i 32TB raid 5 storage (Great for backups, fits neatly inside, mostly very quiet - but the occasional beep on startup is annoying for sure)

2. Sonnet NVME PCIE card with 8TB of Samsung EVOs in raid 0 - fast, silent, I use this for my main workflow alongside the Mac drive itself which is a 4TB

3. Sonnet PCIE card with 2x 4TB SSDs for more secondary storage in raid

4. Pegasus J2i hard drive caddy, with 2 more SSD drives for more storage

5. External OWC Thunderbolt 3 Bay with more storage space for redundant Time Machine/backups


So as you can see, a whole lot fits neatly into the Mac Pro, and I only have that 1 external backup raid that isn't necessary, but I like the redundancy.

In moving to the Mac Studio, I have to somehow manage all of this externally and see what I can reduce or duplicate.

1. Trying the OWC 4M2 NVME external enclosure - speeds are OK with 4 NVME at 2600MB/s, which is about half the speed of when the PCIE card is in the Mac Pro. The fan is super noisy though, so I have to modify it somehow with a more quiet fan or heatsinks.

2. Likewise, all that internal storage has to now go to more external drives which take up a lot more room, thunderbolt ports, power cables, then the single Mac Pro by far.

That neat little Mac Studio just turned into a 2013 Mac Pro with a lot of cables to external devices, negating the small size and quietness of the unit itself.


Oops, I think I just made the case for myself for the....*GASP*.... M2 Ultra Mac Pro? I could stuff everything back in there aside from the Pegasus R4i Raid, but I could add more PCIE cards and migrate that over to more SSDS or NVMEs..


Or maybe I just keep using the Intel Mac Pro because it's usually faster than the M2 Ultra for my workflow anyway, and live with safari opening up .001 seconds slower vs the M2 Ultra.

What a time to be alive! Your heart wants you to get the new Mac Pro or Studio, but your brain tells you "NO!".

I wish Apple made it easier by giving us irresistible new hardware that performed light years ahead of existing 7.1 capabilities, but alas, it's confusion time for most buyers.

Conclusion:


1.) If I never owned an Intel 7.1 Mac Pro, I'd consider the M2 Ultra Mac Pro because (To my brain speaking now) it would allow a neater, quieter, faster workflow setup with more integrated hardware. Plus it is a gorgeous piece of design that is unparalleled, this is now my heart speaking. While the $3k higher price is spicy, it can be somewhat justified with the PCIe slots and build quality for some.

2. If you don't need all that extra external stuff and can work with the Mac Studio and maybe like 1 external device, it is perfect and performance is a Mac Pro level.

3. If you REALLY want to prioritize saving money - the $3k difference from Mac Studio to Mac Pro is just the start of it. You'd be amazed at just how much more you can save by going to even a more basic Mac Studio, which still performs relatively close to the top end hardware now. Some of us are enthusiasts who take joy in having faster hardware, but it's not always the most logical decision with diminishing returns.

 

[avkills]

Good points Rondocap, and I am glad to hear that the 7,1 with the W6800X Duo is holding it's own; but the fact that Apple Silicon is at or close to the same performance overall is pretty damn amazing.

I will be keeping my 7,1 forever as well; I am hoping that Apple does indeed release a similar cased M3 based Mac Pro which is where I think the performance is going to be incredible.

Although that brings up another conundrum. Do I spend money on PCIe drive expansion with the "hope" that Apple will update the current M2 Mac Pro with the same case and M3 bits; or just save my money and wait to see what happens with the M3 announcements.

A quad chip M3 would be very very performant against anything I would think (provided Apple can pull it off.)

 

[rondocap]

Good points Rondocap, and I am glad to hear that the 7,1 with the W6800X Duo is holding it's own; but the fact that Apple Silicon is at or close to the same performance overall is pretty damn amazing.

I will be keeping my 7,1 forever as well; I am hoping that Apple does indeed release a similar cased M3 based Mac Pro which is where I think the performance is going to be incredible.

Although that brings up another conundrum. Do I spend money on PCIe drive expansion with the "hope" that Apple will update the current M2 Mac Pro with the same case and M3 bits; or just save my money and wait to see what happens with the M3 announcements.

A quad chip M3 would be very very performant against anything I would think (provided Apple can pull it off.)

Judging by how long Apple can take to update hardware, I would not plan anything future wise with the M3 or other updates. They could literally go 10 years and just leave this M2 Ultra Mac Pro as is without changing it, like they did for years with the 2013 Mac Pro.

 

[bcomer]

The price difference between the Studio and Mac Pro can be cushioned some what when you consider the costs of purchasing eternal cases for storage.

 

[Pressure]

So why didn't you upgrade to the new Mac Pro? This just seems like a weird choice given it was available.

The MPX connector is just extra power so you could probably find the pinout somewhere. Does the Pegasus R4i even need anything beyond the 75 Watt delivered by the PCIe 16x connector?

 

[rondocap]

So why didn't you upgrade to the new Mac Pro? This just seems like a weird choice given it was available.

The MPX connector is just extra power so you could probably find the pinout somewhere. Does the Pegasus R4i even need anything beyond the 75 Watt delivered by the PCIe 16x connector

If I didn't have the Intel Mac Pro, I totally would have just gone for the Ultra Mac Pro - but I guess the hardware guy in me wanted to try out the Mac Studio and all of the combination of things that can be done externally with it, too.

I also don't want to ditch the Intel Mac Pro yet because of the GPUs, they still do different things than the Ultra M2. The Ultra M2 can also do certain things even better - so I think there is some argument to have both for the separate tasks.

(Like the W6800x Duo for R3D raw, and the M2 Ultra for ProRes, in theory the best performance in each of those workflows)

 

[Boil]

So why didn't you upgrade to the new Mac Pro? This just seems like a weird choice given it was available.

The MPX connector is just extra power so you could probably find the pinout somewhere. Does the Pegasus R4i even need anything beyond the 75 Watt delivered by the PCIe 16x connector?

The MPX connector would be the problem, as there is nowhere for it to plug into, so it would not allow proper seating of the module...

 

[rondocap]

The MPX connector would be the problem, as there is no where for it to plug into, so it would not allow proper seating of the module...

That's right, the new Mac Pro does not work with the R4i because of the MPX system. Sure, technically it probably should, but it doesn't have the appropriate connections for it.

The Promise R4i is actually a pretty neat bit of technology - nicely built and slots in perfectly to the Mac Pro.

 

[ZombiePhysicist]

I really, really like the Mac Pro 7.1. (And going all the way back to the Powermac G5, I have a deep passion for these big "Macs" that sometimes can border on the unreasonable - but that's the Mac Pro for you!)

My workflow is basically video editing with Final Cut, using R3D raw - which is traditionally very GPU intensive and benefits from the W6800x Duo that's in my machine. I also rely on moderate hard drive space for backups and working, and I like them to be fast if I'm using it to edit or move around files.

In my opinion and after various real world tests, the Mac Studio with M2 Ultra finally gets close enough that I'd consider using it for my workflow. Sure, the 28 Core gets beat, but the W6800x Duo GPU is still on average a bit faster for R3D than the M2 Ultra, but it's pretty close now.

I am *never* getting rid of my 7.1 Intel Mac Pro - let me make that clear. I know that if I did, I would just be looking for one in 5 years to have around for "Nostalgia" - even if it's slower. That's the unreasonable side, I have fun with hardware. (I write for Pcworld and Macworld too - so I like tinkering with lots of hardware!)

At the same time, I like to use for my workflow the fastest technology that I can, even if the 7.1 Mac Pro sits idly by looking pretty.

The Mac Studio certainly feels fast in everyday use - just opening up browsers and things like that. Is it night and day vs the Mac Pro? No, the Mac Pro still feel fast too - it feels just slightly faster on the Studio, a minor benefit.

It's certainly quiet - and very small. Fits neatly on my desk, but I don't mind the Mac Pro size, and in fact, the sheer beauty of the design wins over any concerns I'd have with moving it around occasionally. (It's very heavy with the hardware inside)

Right now, here's what is *inside* the Mac Pro aside from the W6800x Duo:

1. Pegasus R4i 32TB raid 5 storage (Great for backups, fits neatly inside, mostly very quiet - but the occasional beep on startup is annoying for sure)

2. Sonnet NVME PCIE card with 8TB of Samsung EVOs in raid 0 - fast, silent, I use this for my main workflow alongside the Mac drive itself which is a 4TB

3. Sonnet PCIE card with 2x 4TB SSDs for more secondary storage in raid

4. Pegasus J2i hard drive caddy, with 2 more SSD drives for more storage

5. External OWC Thunderbolt 3 Bay with more storage space for redundant Time Machine/backups


So as you can see, a whole lot fits neatly into the Mac Pro, and I only have that 1 external backup raid that isn't necessary, but I like the redundancy.

In moving to the Mac Studio, I have to somehow manage all of this externally and see what I can reduce or duplicate.

1. Trying the OWC 4M2 NVME external enclosure - speeds are OK with 4 NVME at 2600MB/s, which is about half the speed of when the PCIE card is in the Mac Pro. The fan is super noisy though, so I have to modify it somehow with a more quiet fan or heatsinks.

2. Likewise, all that internal storage has to now go to more external drives which take up a lot more room, thunderbolt ports, power cables, then the single Mac Pro by far.

That neat little Mac Studio just turned into a 2013 Mac Pro with a lot of cables to external devices, negating the small size and quietness of the unit itself.


Oops, I think I just made the case for myself for the....*GASP*.... M2 Ultra Mac Pro? I could stuff everything back in there aside from the Pegasus R4i Raid, but I could add more PCIE cards and migrate that over to more SSDS or NVMEs..


Or maybe I just keep using the Intel Mac Pro because it's usually faster than the M2 Ultra for my workflow anyway, and live with safari opening up .001 seconds slower vs the M2 Ultra.

What a time to be alive! Your heart wants you to get the new Mac Pro or Studio, but your brain tells you "NO!".

I wish Apple made it easier by giving us irresistible new hardware that performed light years ahead of existing 7.1 capabilities, but alas, it's confusion time for most buyers.

Conclusion:


1.) If I never owned an Intel 7.1 Mac Pro, I'd consider the M2 Ultra Mac Pro because (To my brain speaking now) it would allow a neater, quieter, faster workflow setup with more integrated hardware. Plus it is a gorgeous piece of design that is unparalleled, this is now my heart speaking. While the $3k higher price is spicy, it can be somewhat justified with the PCIe slots and build quality for some.

2. If you don't need all that extra external stuff and can work with the Mac Studio and maybe like 1 external device, it is perfect and performance is a Mac Pro level.

3. If you REALLY want to prioritize saving money - the $3k difference from Mac Studio to Mac Pro is just the start of it. You'd be amazed at just how much more you can save by going to even a more basic Mac Studio, which still performs relatively close to the top end hardware now. Some of us are enthusiasts who take joy in having faster hardware, but it's not always the most logical decision with diminishing returns.

I think the M2 is the poster child for buyers remorse. The M3 is going to be 3nm and that will just give it a lot more room to run. Also, they may just fix and be able to produce an extreme version of the M3 for the Mac Pro. That alone is reason enough to wait, IMO. Right now I'm very comfy with the 7,1 and the M2 Macs are just kind of insulting to me.

Of course if you need a computer right now, you need a computer right now. Not much to think about it.

But if you can wait, the M2 seems to be the one to skip.

One interesting thing, that will not help those seeking cheap 7,1 deals. A lot of us plan to keep them even when we do get new machines. For whatever reason, the 7,1 feels special and like a keeper. I'm with you guys, I will not be selling it. But will just wait for the M3 and hope it's closer to a real Mac Pro...

 

[avro707]

I think the M2 is the poster child for buyers remorse. The M3 is going to be 3nm and that will just give it a lot more room to run. Also, they may just fix and be able to produce an extreme version of the M3 for the Mac Pro. That alone is reason enough to wait, IMO. Right now I'm very comfy with the 7,1 and the M2 Macs are just kind of insulting to me.

Of course if you need a computer right now, you need a computer right now. Not much to think about it.

But if you can wait, the M2 seems to be the one to skip.

One interesting thing, that will not help those seeking cheap 7,1 deals. A lot of us plan to keep them even when we do get new machines. For whatever reason, the 7,1 feels special and like a keeper. I'm with you guys, I will not be selling it. But will just wait for the M3 and hope it's closer to a real Mac Pro...

That is true, the folks on here saying that...

1. the 7,1 is worthless and going for nothing
2. my friends can't even give them away they are so worthless and nobody wants them
3. and besides, I like the 6,1 because it was round and black...

... are not going to be finding $1000 or less machines for sale fully optioned up or even just middle to low spec. They will probably still be expensive. When I was looking even a base model was still damn expensive second hand in my country. And higher spec machines were so expensive they weren't worth it second hand. The other scenarios were scam listings on eBay or machines "upgraded" with 28 core 2.5ghz QS processors still at huge prices. I got fed up with that and just purchased new. I don't think the new machine will change that.

Mine will be sticking around for quite a while longer. I won't get rid of it, just will supplement it with a PC workstation and maybe retire the oldest 5,1.

 

[Pressure]

The MPX connector would be the problem, as there is nowhere for it to plug into, so it would not allow proper seating of the module...

Yes, we are all aware.

That's why I referred to the pinout of the MPX connector. All data runs over the PCIe 16x slot, which is present and also provides up to 75 Watt of power (which in theory should be more than enough for 4 drives).

 

[ekwipt]

Get a new Mac Pro and the latest Sonnet Card that runs 8 x NVME cards at Gen 4 PCIe speeds, will be a lot faster than what you currently have. Ditch everything else internally and just run the Thunderbolt chassis for your backups.

FCP is made for Apple Silicone processors and the software updates will squeeze even more out of the system. I'd sell your current MAc Pro and buy the latest one before the prices drop too quickly on your current machine.

 

[chfilm]

Man I'm with you! Exactly in the same boat like you, even though I have to edit less R3d Footage and more h264/h265 besides prores, which makes the m2ultra look a lot more tempting... :/
I also think the m3 is the one to hold out for, but I'm just worrying about the value loss of the 7.1.
I dont have as much internal storage, just a single 2tb ssd blade and a sonnet 4x4 8TB Raid on PCIe which would be sad to give up... but managable.

Upgrading the mac pro to 28c maybe? I just have the dual vega II 16c, which STILL seems to be on par with the mac studio for r3d decoding. But in after effects, where I also do a lot of stuff, the m2 crushes the 7.1. It runs more stable on intel though.

 

[Mac3Duser]

I think the 8.1 is not for the 7.1 owners.
If you have a 7.1, wait for the M3 ultra (and extreme ?)

 

[chfilm]

I think the 8.1 is not for the 7.1 owners.
If you have a 7.1, wait for the M3 ultra (and extreme ?)

I would never buy an 8.1. No way! Mac Studio maybe..

 

[NewUsername]

Seems like you are one of the (few) people for whom a Mac Pro is considerably better than a Mac Studio, so I would buy a Mac Pro… if you need it. If you’re still fine on Intel, I would wait a little longer.

Either the M2 Ultra Mac Pro is a stopgap, and we’ll see the M3 Ultra (and M3 Extreme?) Mac Pro in 1-2 years, which would be a lot more interesting for you.

Or the Mac Pro will be removed from the lineup once the M3 Ultra Mac Studio is launched. In that case, Apple makes the choice for you.

 

[Longplays]

I think the 8.1 is not for the 7.1 owners.
If you have a 7.1, wait for the M3 ultra (and extreme ?)

I second this.

3nm M3 Ultra/Extreme will likely be out Q1 2025.

Your 2019 Mac Pro's turning 4 by December and will be 5 years and a quarter when the next Ultra/Extreme will be out.

 

[Rob__Mac]

Sounds like we have fairly similar setups. I have a W5700X and a 6900XT in my 7.1 and it kills the M2 Ultra for 3D rendering.

If I were you I'd keep your cash for now and see what happens in the future.

I didn't take my own advice and am typing this from a 16" MBP with M2 Max, which is an amazing portable machine - but neither of the new desktops mean you should replace you 7.1 just yet.

 

[Spaceboi Scaphandre]

I really, really like the Mac Pro 7.1. (And going all the way back to the Powermac G5, I have a deep passion for these big "Macs" that sometimes can border on the unreasonable - but that's the Mac Pro for you!)

My workflow is basically video editing with Final Cut, using R3D raw - which is traditionally very GPU intensive and benefits from the W6800x Duo that's in my machine. I also rely on moderate hard drive space for backups and working, and I like them to be fast if I'm using it to edit or move around files.

In my opinion and after various real world tests, the Mac Studio with M2 Ultra finally gets close enough that I'd consider using it for my workflow. Sure, the 28 Core gets beat, but the W6800x Duo GPU is still on average a bit faster for R3D than the M2 Ultra, but it's pretty close now.

I am *never* getting rid of my 7.1 Intel Mac Pro - let me make that clear. I know that if I did, I would just be looking for one in 5 years to have around for "Nostalgia" - even if it's slower. That's the unreasonable side, I have fun with hardware. (I write for Pcworld and Macworld too - so I like tinkering with lots of hardware!)

At the same time, I like to use for my workflow the fastest technology that I can, even if the 7.1 Mac Pro sits idly by looking pretty.

The Mac Studio certainly feels fast in everyday use - just opening up browsers and things like that. Is it night and day vs the Mac Pro? No, the Mac Pro still feel fast too - it feels just slightly faster on the Studio, a minor benefit.

It's certainly quiet - and very small. Fits neatly on my desk, but I don't mind the Mac Pro size, and in fact, the sheer beauty of the design wins over any concerns I'd have with moving it around occasionally. (It's very heavy with the hardware inside)

Right now, here's what is *inside* the Mac Pro aside from the W6800x Duo:

1. Pegasus R4i 32TB raid 5 storage (Great for backups, fits neatly inside, mostly very quiet - but the occasional beep on startup is annoying for sure)

2. Sonnet NVME PCIE card with 8TB of Samsung EVOs in raid 0 - fast, silent, I use this for my main workflow alongside the Mac drive itself which is a 4TB

3. Sonnet PCIE card with 2x 4TB SSDs for more secondary storage in raid

4. Pegasus J2i hard drive caddy, with 2 more SSD drives for more storage

5. External OWC Thunderbolt 3 Bay with more storage space for redundant Time Machine/backups


So as you can see, a whole lot fits neatly into the Mac Pro, and I only have that 1 external backup raid that isn't necessary, but I like the redundancy.

In moving to the Mac Studio, I have to somehow manage all of this externally and see what I can reduce or duplicate.

1. Trying the OWC 4M2 NVME external enclosure - speeds are OK with 4 NVME at 2600MB/s, which is about half the speed of when the PCIE card is in the Mac Pro. The fan is super noisy though, so I have to modify it somehow with a more quiet fan or heatsinks.

2. Likewise, all that internal storage has to now go to more external drives which take up a lot more room, thunderbolt ports, power cables, then the single Mac Pro by far.

That neat little Mac Studio just turned into a 2013 Mac Pro with a lot of cables to external devices, negating the small size and quietness of the unit itself.


Oops, I think I just made the case for myself for the....*GASP*.... M2 Ultra Mac Pro? I could stuff everything back in there aside from the Pegasus R4i Raid, but I could add more PCIE cards and migrate that over to more SSDS or NVMEs..


Or maybe I just keep using the Intel Mac Pro because it's usually faster than the M2 Ultra for my workflow anyway, and live with safari opening up .001 seconds slower vs the M2 Ultra.

What a time to be alive! Your heart wants you to get the new Mac Pro or Studio, but your brain tells you "NO!".

I wish Apple made it easier by giving us irresistible new hardware that performed light years ahead of existing 7.1 capabilities, but alas, it's confusion time for most buyers.

Conclusion:


1.) If I never owned an Intel 7.1 Mac Pro, I'd consider the M2 Ultra Mac Pro because (To my brain speaking now) it would allow a neater, quieter, faster workflow setup with more integrated hardware. Plus it is a gorgeous piece of design that is unparalleled, this is now my heart speaking. While the $3k higher price is spicy, it can be somewhat justified with the PCIe slots and build quality for some.

2. If you don't need all that extra external stuff and can work with the Mac Studio and maybe like 1 external device, it is perfect and performance is a Mac Pro level.

3. If you REALLY want to prioritize saving money - the $3k difference from Mac Studio to Mac Pro is just the start of it. You'd be amazed at just how much more you can save by going to even a more basic Mac Studio, which still performs relatively close to the top end hardware now. Some of us are enthusiasts who take joy in having faster hardware, but it's not always the most logical decision with diminishing returns.

Are you The Macalope? Because this all sounds like something The Macalope would write.

 

[rondocap]

Are you The Macalope? Because this all sounds like something The Macalope would write.

I am not. I have written for Mac World, however. I write for PC World primarily (GPUs, motherboard reviews, etc)

 

[Yebubbleman]

I really, really like the Mac Pro 7.1. (And going all the way back to the Powermac G5, I have a deep passion for these big "Macs" that sometimes can border on the unreasonable - but that's the Mac Pro for you!)

My workflow is basically video editing with Final Cut, using R3D raw - which is traditionally very GPU intensive and benefits from the W6800x Duo that's in my machine. I also rely on moderate hard drive space for backups and working, and I like them to be fast if I'm using it to edit or move around files.

In my opinion and after various real world tests, the Mac Studio with M2 Ultra finally gets close enough that I'd consider using it for my workflow. Sure, the 28 Core gets beat, but the W6800x Duo GPU is still on average a bit faster for R3D than the M2 Ultra, but it's pretty close now.

I am *never* getting rid of my 7.1 Intel Mac Pro - let me make that clear. I know that if I did, I would just be looking for one in 5 years to have around for "Nostalgia" - even if it's slower. That's the unreasonable side, I have fun with hardware. (I write for Pcworld and Macworld too - so I like tinkering with lots of hardware!)

At the same time, I like to use for my workflow the fastest technology that I can, even if the 7.1 Mac Pro sits idly by looking pretty.

The Mac Studio certainly feels fast in everyday use - just opening up browsers and things like that. Is it night and day vs the Mac Pro? No, the Mac Pro still feel fast too - it feels just slightly faster on the Studio, a minor benefit.

It's certainly quiet - and very small. Fits neatly on my desk, but I don't mind the Mac Pro size, and in fact, the sheer beauty of the design wins over any concerns I'd have with moving it around occasionally. (It's very heavy with the hardware inside)

Right now, here's what is *inside* the Mac Pro aside from the W6800x Duo:

1. Pegasus R4i 32TB raid 5 storage (Great for backups, fits neatly inside, mostly very quiet - but the occasional beep on startup is annoying for sure)

2. Sonnet NVME PCIE card with 8TB of Samsung EVOs in raid 0 - fast, silent, I use this for my main workflow alongside the Mac drive itself which is a 4TB

3. Sonnet PCIE card with 2x 4TB SSDs for more secondary storage in raid

4. Pegasus J2i hard drive caddy, with 2 more SSD drives for more storage

5. External OWC Thunderbolt 3 Bay with more storage space for redundant Time Machine/backups


So as you can see, a whole lot fits neatly into the Mac Pro, and I only have that 1 external backup raid that isn't necessary, but I like the redundancy.

In moving to the Mac Studio, I have to somehow manage all of this externally and see what I can reduce or duplicate.

1. Trying the OWC 4M2 NVME external enclosure - speeds are OK with 4 NVME at 2600MB/s, which is about half the speed of when the PCIE card is in the Mac Pro. The fan is super noisy though, so I have to modify it somehow with a more quiet fan or heatsinks.

2. Likewise, all that internal storage has to now go to more external drives which take up a lot more room, thunderbolt ports, power cables, then the single Mac Pro by far.

That neat little Mac Studio just turned into a 2013 Mac Pro with a lot of cables to external devices, negating the small size and quietness of the unit itself.


Oops, I think I just made the case for myself for the....*GASP*.... M2 Ultra Mac Pro? I could stuff everything back in there aside from the Pegasus R4i Raid, but I could add more PCIE cards and migrate that over to more SSDS or NVMEs..


Or maybe I just keep using the Intel Mac Pro because it's usually faster than the M2 Ultra for my workflow anyway, and live with safari opening up .001 seconds slower vs the M2 Ultra.

What a time to be alive! Your heart wants you to get the new Mac Pro or Studio, but your brain tells you "NO!".

I wish Apple made it easier by giving us irresistible new hardware that performed light years ahead of existing 7.1 capabilities, but alas, it's confusion time for most buyers.

Conclusion:


1.) If I never owned an Intel 7.1 Mac Pro, I'd consider the M2 Ultra Mac Pro because (To my brain speaking now) it would allow a neater, quieter, faster workflow setup with more integrated hardware. Plus it is a gorgeous piece of design that is unparalleled, this is now my heart speaking. While the $3k higher price is spicy, it can be somewhat justified with the PCIe slots and build quality for some.

2. If you don't need all that extra external stuff and can work with the Mac Studio and maybe like 1 external device, it is perfect and performance is a Mac Pro level.

3. If you REALLY want to prioritize saving money - the $3k difference from Mac Studio to Mac Pro is just the start of it. You'd be amazed at just how much more you can save by going to even a more basic Mac Studio, which still performs relatively close to the top end hardware now. Some of us are enthusiasts who take joy in having faster hardware, but it's not always the most logical decision with diminishing returns.

There's something to be said about PCIe expansion and having things like drives that you only intend to use with that system internal rather than external. The $3000 price differential is insane and it's unlikely that a casual lover of towers would need the performance of M2 Ultra over M2 Max, let alone M2 Pro.

I think people who hoped against hope that Apple would make some exception in their unified memory/architecture model for the Apple Silicon Mac Pro and that we'd have RAM and GPUs that could be upgraded separate from the SoC. Though, Apple not offering socketed SoCs was, indeed, a bummer. Past all that, I think the 2023 Mac Pro still maintains the practicality of its 2019 predecessor. Though, like you, I won't debate that there is a certain magic that the 2019 model has (by virtue of having EVERYTHING be replaceable/expandable aftermarket) that any Apple Silicon Mac (2023 or otherwise) would inherently not be able to have. Hopefully it still serves the high-end internal-expansion-reliant market.

 

[0339327]

I really, really like the Mac Pro 7.1. (And going all the way back to the Powermac G5, I have a deep passion for these big "Macs" that sometimes can border on the unreasonable - but that's the Mac Pro for you!)

My workflow is basically video editing with Final Cut, using R3D raw - which is traditionally very GPU intensive and benefits from the W6800x Duo that's in my machine. I also rely on moderate hard drive space for backups and working, and I like them to be fast if I'm using it to edit or move around files.

In my opinion and after various real world tests, the Mac Studio with M2 Ultra finally gets close enough that I'd consider using it for my workflow. Sure, the 28 Core gets beat, but the W6800x Duo GPU is still on average a bit faster for R3D than the M2 Ultra, but it's pretty close now.

I am *never* getting rid of my 7.1 Intel Mac Pro - let me make that clear. I know that if I did, I would just be looking for one in 5 years to have around for "Nostalgia" - even if it's slower. That's the unreasonable side, I have fun with hardware. (I write for Pcworld and Macworld too - so I like tinkering with lots of hardware!)

At the same time, I like to use for my workflow the fastest technology that I can, even if the 7.1 Mac Pro sits idly by looking pretty.

The Mac Studio certainly feels fast in everyday use - just opening up browsers and things like that. Is it night and day vs the Mac Pro? No, the Mac Pro still feel fast too - it feels just slightly faster on the Studio, a minor benefit.

It's certainly quiet - and very small. Fits neatly on my desk, but I don't mind the Mac Pro size, and in fact, the sheer beauty of the design wins over any concerns I'd have with moving it around occasionally. (It's very heavy with the hardware inside)

Right now, here's what is *inside* the Mac Pro aside from the W6800x Duo:

1. Pegasus R4i 32TB raid 5 storage (Great for backups, fits neatly inside, mostly very quiet - but the occasional beep on startup is annoying for sure)

2. Sonnet NVME PCIE card with 8TB of Samsung EVOs in raid 0 - fast, silent, I use this for my main workflow alongside the Mac drive itself which is a 4TB

3. Sonnet PCIE card with 2x 4TB SSDs for more secondary storage in raid

4. Pegasus J2i hard drive caddy, with 2 more SSD drives for more storage

5. External OWC Thunderbolt 3 Bay with more storage space for redundant Time Machine/backups


So as you can see, a whole lot fits neatly into the Mac Pro, and I only have that 1 external backup raid that isn't necessary, but I like the redundancy.

In moving to the Mac Studio, I have to somehow manage all of this externally and see what I can reduce or duplicate.

1. Trying the OWC 4M2 NVME external enclosure - speeds are OK with 4 NVME at 2600MB/s, which is about half the speed of when the PCIE card is in the Mac Pro. The fan is super noisy though, so I have to modify it somehow with a more quiet fan or heatsinks.

2. Likewise, all that internal storage has to now go to more external drives which take up a lot more room, thunderbolt ports, power cables, then the single Mac Pro by far.

That neat little Mac Studio just turned into a 2013 Mac Pro with a lot of cables to external devices, negating the small size and quietness of the unit itself.


Oops, I think I just made the case for myself for the....*GASP*.... M2 Ultra Mac Pro? I could stuff everything back in there aside from the Pegasus R4i Raid, but I could add more PCIE cards and migrate that over to more SSDS or NVMEs..


Or maybe I just keep using the Intel Mac Pro because it's usually faster than the M2 Ultra for my workflow anyway, and live with safari opening up .001 seconds slower vs the M2 Ultra.

What a time to be alive! Your heart wants you to get the new Mac Pro or Studio, but your brain tells you "NO!".

I wish Apple made it easier by giving us irresistible new hardware that performed light years ahead of existing 7.1 capabilities, but alas, it's confusion time for most buyers.

Conclusion:


1.) If I never owned an Intel 7.1 Mac Pro, I'd consider the M2 Ultra Mac Pro because (To my brain speaking now) it would allow a neater, quieter, faster workflow setup with more integrated hardware. Plus it is a gorgeous piece of design that is unparalleled, this is now my heart speaking. While the $3k higher price is spicy, it can be somewhat justified with the PCIe slots and build quality for some.

2. If you don't need all that extra external stuff and can work with the Mac Studio and maybe like 1 external device, it is perfect and performance is a Mac Pro level.

3. If you REALLY want to prioritize saving money - the $3k difference from Mac Studio to Mac Pro is just the start of it. You'd be amazed at just how much more you can save by going to even a more basic Mac Studio, which still performs relatively close to the top end hardware now. Some of us are enthusiasts who take joy in having faster hardware, but it's not always the most logical decision with diminishing returns.

I am in a similar boat. I love my 2019 and am displeased with Apple’s obvious apathy towards the Pro line.

I had some pointed questions about the MacPro and contacted Apple for more insight.

I also don’t want to have a desk full of accessories for a Studio but would love to save $3K if I can. (The MacPro for my needs is $9,599 and the Studio, with the same specs is $6,599.)

It seems there is a way to get what I want. Also, it would cost roughly $1K - 1.5K to make the Studio work for my needs, thus lowering the price difference.

 

[ninecows]

I am in a similar boat. I love my 2019 and am displeased with Apple’s obvious apathy towards the Pro line.

I had some pointed questions about the MacPro and contacted Apple for more insight.

I also don’t want to have a desk full of accessories for a Studio but would love to save $3K if I can. (The MacPro for my needs is $9,599 and the Studio, with the same specs is $6,599.)

It seems there is a way to get what I want. Also, it would cost roughly $1K - 1.5K to make the Studio work for my needs, thus lowering the price difference.

Someone should start making pretty enclosures/cabinets that can fit a Mac Studio and a bunch of accessories. And sell them for $1,500 with a nice profit.

Edit: and put wheels on it for only $100 extra.

 

[MisterAndrew]

Another thing to consider is that official support for the M2 Ultra Mac Pro will end only 1 year after the 2019 Mac Pro; the clock starts ticking when it’s replaced by the M3 version next year. So considering that, and the amount of money people have spent on their 7,1, there is zero reason to replace it yet if it does a good job for you. Except if you want to stay current you’ll need to buy a new machine in a few years regardless whether you currently have the 2019 or the 2023 Mac Pro (or a Studio).

 

[ZombiePhysicist]

Another thing to consider is that official support for the M2 Ultra Mac Pro will end only 1 year after the 2019 Mac Pro; the clock starts ticking when it’s replaced by the M3 version next year. So considering that, and the amount of money people have spent on their 7,1, there is zero reason to replace it yet if it does a good job for you. Except if you want to stay current you’ll need to buy a new machine in a few years regardless whether you currently have the 2019 or the 2023 Mac Pro (or a Studio).

More and more clear that the M2 chip is the one to skip (on the high end desktop at least).