You can make it even simpler—if you don't know you need the Mac Pro, then you don't need the Mac Pro.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Mac Studio vs. Mac Pro Buyer's Guide
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
With the update to the guide this is why I said the Mac Studio should be rebranded as the Mac Pro at this rate, because it's pretty much a Mac Pro in everything except expandability and absurd price tag, and even then the Studio has so many thunderbolt ports on it you can easily just add external SSDs to it.
It is funny..
if you search YouTube or reviews concerning the new Mac Pro, basically everyone says "what the..???"
But YouTuber's and reviewers viewer base are basically average consumers who read/watch to make decisions to buy, believing that these click bait income people "know" better...believing that they know more than the pros who really know better and who actually buy instead of writing or complaining on blogs.
Apple knows what they are doing...
Mac Pro is for the high end business users and not the average buyer.
Mac Pro is back on track after the poor decision to move to consumer Mac Pros back in 2011-13 as they open it up to the average buyer.. Apple has finally made the separation again and it is not difficult to know what to purchase now concerning Desktop Macs (Mini, Mini Pro, Mac Studio, Mac Pro).
Mac Pro buyers know if they need it.
(They spend their budgeted money on Mac Pro and it pays for itself after their first project or check comes in...then...when the M3 Mac Pro comes out...they will buy it...again...etc. etc.). For "Pros", it pays for itself in a blink of an eye.
Mac Studio is for everyone else who needs extra power over the Mini.
Easy review and decision.
Apple will probably not sell a lot of the M2 Mac Pros...but they know that already.
They are catering to their high-end "Pro" base that "NEED" modular PCI added cards and special industry etc. Mac Pro will be bought also for server(s) based business' etc.
It looks like (to me) Apple really wanted to end the Intel Era (and move on) and they just put Mac Pro out to keep on track with their projections and forecast plans. Probably Mac Pro with silicone had issues with modular with adding more PCI graphic cards etc. on top of their already built in GPU etc., including extra RAM cards that are suppose to work with their silicone RAM on their chips etc. This was probably (guess) why it was delayed and going back and forth whether to have a M1 Ultra Max Max or a M2 (something) or just wait until the M3 (which also sounded from Rumors), that like the M3 had some hiccups in development/scheduling also, causing more delays and decisions concerning Mac Pro).
The Future..
Fine-tuning the OS for Silicone instead of the old architecture of Intel will probably get more power and speed out of the chips than what we have yet seen, instead of always having to increase or add more RAM, CPU & GPU cores...if they spend time on the OS...then (let's say: Silicone 8GB of RAM integrated on their chips could go along way with Metal+++ (act like 32 GB on an Intel machine etc....) We will see what the future holds once Apple no longer has to be concerned with Intel Macs...
The NExT Mac Pro...M3, M4 etc....that will be something.....
Not at this time and likely not in the (at least near) future.
The OWC Accelsior 8M2 supports those speeds and can be ordered with up to 64GB of storage.
External SSDs are limited to TB4's transfer rate, which is fine for general use, but it is significantly slower than what PCIe Gen4 can support and some workloads can take advantage of that much higher performance.
Also, if you have multiple audio or video PCIe cards in your current 2019 Mac Pro and are considering moving from Intel to Apple Silicon for your workflows, being able to keep those internal on the 2023 model is likely more desirable than having multiple external PCIe enclosures connected to the Mac Studio via TB4.
We've always bought Mac Pros with minimal on-board storage for our video production devices (small shop producing 20 to 90 minute documentaries.)
All the media assets are on a SAN so that projects can be shared, backed up, and otherwise managed.
We have literally never upgraded a Mac Pro after initial deployment as an editing station, even back in the day when they were more capable of upgrades. We have used the slots for SAN fiber connectivity.
You responded to a comment from over a year ago. Of course it still holds true. M2 Ultra can’t match the top AMD 6000 series GPUs and certainly not 7000 series.
At $3000 more though? Is the convenience of keeping your storage internal worth that extra $3000?
Apple has a dedicated hardware and software team that work with their most "pro" professional customers and it stands to reason that they have been talking to 2019 Mac Pro customers as they developed the 2023 Mac Pro. And it stands to reason there were discussions about workflows that were using the various AMD GPU options the 2019 Mac Pro offered.
Some portion of those workflows will work as well as or better with the integrated GPU cores in the M2 Ultra while others will not. We can speculate about those percentages, but considering Apple went through the trouble of actually migrating the Mac Pro chassis to Apple Silicon rather than dropping the Mac Pro model from the desktop lineup implies enough 2019 Mac Pro customers can make the 2023 Mac Pro work for them and have expressed sufficient intent to purchase it to give Apple the confidence to move forward and offer it.
For that percentage that need more graphics performance than the M2 Ultra can provide, they have options:
Some portion of those workflows will work as well as or better with the integrated GPU cores in the M2 Ultra while others will not. We can speculate about those percentages, but considering Apple went through the trouble of actually migrating the Mac Pro chassis to Apple Silicon rather than dropping the Mac Pro model from the desktop lineup implies enough 2019 Mac Pro customers can make the 2023 Mac Pro work for them and have expressed sufficient intent to purchase it to give Apple the confidence to move forward and offer it.
For that percentage that need more graphics performance than the M2 Ultra can provide, they have options:
- Continue to use their 2019 Mac Pro until Apple stops supporting it with OS updates and parts availability around 2027-2030;
- Migrate off of macOS to Windows/Linux once their 2019 Mac Pros are no longer sufficient;
- Wait to see what future generations of the M series bring in terms of GPU performance
You never added internal drive space? What capacity did you purchase it with would you say?
Again, it depends on the workflow. In addition to the higher price of the Mac Pro, those PCIe storage cards are not cheap (64GB is almost $13,000). But if you are generating content that brings in seven-figures-plus per year, then it's all relative, isn't it?
I'm actually surprised with them having the same eact chip that Apple is continuing with Studio. As an M1 studio owner, I am glad they are.
I never believed Apple would make the Studio a "one model pony" like the iMac Pro because it does address use cases that the Mac mini Pro cannot and it is significantly cheaper and more compact than the Mac Pro.
The Mac Pro ended up being "Ultra only" due to the inability to get the "Extreme" to work (at least at 5nm). Apple may yet be able to offer an SoC with more cores than the Ultra down the road as processes shrink and mature.
So, correct me if I'm wrong, but what I'm reading here is that as a person who actually has the budget and need for the Mac Pro, the new version does not meet your needs. In the very limited and anecdotal information I've heard from people like yourself who actually have and use an Intel Mac Pro, none so far have found its replacement to be suitable.
I’ve read a lot of interesting points here. Some. But as a pro user. Currently using 256gb of ram on a 16 core for vfx and motion design I can’t see how this Mac Pro works. Sure it’s a welcome upgrade, and of course there will be customers who don’t want that flex. Yes absolutely I understand pci, infact my GPU’s and ram have been upgraded several times. So remove that from the table and this is effectively is a big box with no upgradability of anything of real use. Sure I can upgrade the storage, awesome. But I can’t use my super expensive MPX modules that are only 3 years old, and let’s be honest if you’ve just spent 6k on the latest 6000 cards you’re not doing anything just yet. But the real things people want and to upgrade cannot be touched. I’ve been a Mac pro user for over 15 years. And apple have never asked me a single opinion poll. They care about the YouTube and influencer market, just look at the videos from the reviewers of the kit.
It doesn’t boil down to that at all. Not even a little bit.
Sorry if I missed it, but what configuration are the PCIe slots in? How many x1, x2, x4, x8, and x16 slots? Also, how many are mechanically x16, but function at x8 speeds or whatever?
The Mac Studio is a great machine. I am a former (retired) Production Artist/Retoucher. After 12 years, I retired my flawless 6-core Mac Pro/30" Cinema Display last year for the Mac Studio M1 Max [64 RAM/2TB] and 27" Studio Display. Also moved all my data from spinning drives to 4 & 8TB SSDs mounted on the back of my display - the bliss of silence. This effortlessly handles my InDesign EPUB projects and occasional Photoshop work. The new Mac Pro offers me nothing but a $$$$ deduction from my savings and more juice from the grid. No regrets.