Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Mac Studio M1 Max 24gpu vs 32gpu

JirkaCink

JirkaCink

macrumors newbie
Original poster
Oct 28, 2022
8
1
Czech
Hello, I am planning to buy Mac Studio with M1 Max chip, but I don't know if I should choose Apple M1 Max Chip with 10-core CPU, 24-core GPU, 16-core Neural Engine or Apple M1 Max Chip with 10-core CPU, 32-core GPU, 16-core Neural Engine.

I would like to ask if there is a big difference in performance or not?
I would like to use Mac Studio for creating UIX in Adobe XD and creating a logo design in Adobe illustrator.

Thanks in advance for the advice.
 

Attachments

  • Snímek obrazovky 2022-11-02 v 13.56.05.png
    Snímek obrazovky 2022-11-02 v 13.56.05.png
    1.8 MB · Views: 465
I don't have specifics to your situation, but I tend to keep my gear longer. Thus, I purchase highest spec as possible, especially with machines like these that cannot be upgraded later. For $200, I would not hesitate.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DeepIn2U
Pick up the 24 and then watch the GPU load when you're doing production runs and note how much room you have left. If headroom is below your comfort level, then return the 24 and get the 32. I'd guess that most on this forum haven't tried both models.
 
  • Like
Reactions: mr_jomo and JirkaCink
pshufd said:
Pick up the 24 and then watch the GPU load when you're doing production runs and note how much room you have left. If headroom is below your comfort level, then return the 24 and get the 32. I'd guess that most on this forum haven't tried both models.
Click to expand...
If you look up system requirements for Adobe XD and Illustrator, it's clear they're not GPU-intensive apps. I don't think a return will be necessary, the 24-core Studio should be fine.
 
JirkaCink said:
Hello, I am planning to buy Mac Studio with M1 Max chip, but I don't know if I should choose Apple M1 Max Chip with 10-core CPU, 24-core GPU, 16-core Neural Engine or Apple M1 Max Chip with 10-core CPU, 32-core GPU, 16-core Neural Engine.

I would like to ask if there is a big difference in performance or not?
I would like to use Mac Studio for creating UIX in Adobe XD and creating a logo design in Adobe illustrator.

Thanks in advance for the advice.
Click to expand...
Go for the 24 Core.

Eve my 10/16 M1-Pro MBP with 16GB RAM handles your workload without breaking a sweat.
 
  • Like
Reactions: pshufd
Or go for the M2 Pro 30gpu cores...same price as the M1 pro 24 but almost closed to the M1 Max32 in the gpu performance
 
  • Haha
Reactions: EzisAA
In the same position as OP.
Does anyone have a Geekbench compute score page for a BASE Mac Studio Max?
 
er-minio said:
Thanks a lot!
Is that yours?

I'm trying to use the compute score to (roughly) compare it with my existing setup.
Click to expand...

Yes. I just ran it.

I do not have my full production set up yet but I suspect that I could come close to maxing out the GPU cores with my full setup. Fortunately I don't run my full setup very often. I have the M1 mini and the Studio running right now and it's clear that both of them would easily cover my requirements but I'd like to be able to run everything on the Studio.
 
Thank you too.

I'm scoring around 55k both Metal and OpenCL at the moment.
I rarely max the CPU, but might make sense to invest a few extra quid in the 32 core GPU as I normally keep my machines for a number of years.
 
er-minio said:
Thank you too.

I'm scoring around 55k both Metal and OpenCL at the moment.
I rarely max the CPU, but might make sense to invest a few extra quid in the 32 core GPU as I normally keep my machines for a number of years.
Click to expand...

Why do you think it will make any difference? You either do GPU-intensive work or you don’t. If you don’t and don’t plan to, a slightly faster GPU won’t matter even after a few years.
 
leman said:
Why do you think it will make any difference? You either do GPU-intensive work or you don’t.
Click to expand...

Yes, it makes sense. To be fair the base model looks good, the slightly more powerful GPU is a small cost addition, especially spread over a few years of computer life.

The work varies usually, I generally have a few "spikes" of intensive usage here and there work-wise, I also use the same Mac as my personal machine and, that can be kept into account, like some video editing with (probably) increasing video quality over the next few year (= heavier usage with time). Difference in computing power might not be massive, but would still be there.
 
er-minio said:
Yes, it makes sense. To be fair the base model looks good, the slightly more powerful GPU is a small cost addition, especially spread over a few years of computer life.

The work varies usually, I generally have a few "spikes" of intensive usage here and there work-wise, I also use the same Mac as my personal machine and, that can be kept into account, like some video editing with (probably) increasing video quality over the next few year (= heavier usage with time). Difference in computing power might not be massive, but would still be there.
Click to expand...

Now that’s reasoning I can totally get behind it :) One doesn’t have to over-rationalize purchase decisions, it’s perfectly fine to get something simply because that’s what one wants to get.
 
  • Like
Reactions: er-minio
er-minio said:
...some video editing with (probably) increasing video quality over the next few year (= heavier usage with time)...
Click to expand...
The GPU demands of video editing are highly variable. For pure editing, it is mostly limited by decode/encode performance. For effects and esp. for things like Neat Video noise reduction, Imagenomic Portraiture, Digital Anarchy Flicker Free, Resolve's Magic Mask, Face Refinement, Depth Map, temporal/spatial noise reduction, etc, you cannot buy a fast enough GPU. As a professional video editor, I have a top-spec M1 Ultra Mac Studio and if I could buy one that was 8x faster, I could use that.
 
I've got an M1 Max 24c and it's a real mixed bag with Adobe apps. It runs Adobe Illustrator like arse. Indesign is a downgrade. Photoshop is a coin toss. The only one I would say works better than Intel is After Effects.

If you're sticking to vectors in Illustrator it'll probably be ok. Illustrator has always slowed down when embedding images or effects but it's turned up to the max (no pun intended) with the M1 versions, I have found. My 2017 iMac was way faster.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back