The new Mac Studio is the mid-range standalone desktop computer that many Apple users have been asking for.

All product photography by DL Cade

Afterward many months of speculation and some very authentic leaks, Apple finally unveiled the "professional Mac Mini" that many of us have been waiting for. It's most three times thicker and several times more powerful than the Mac mini, and it'southward called the Mac Studio.

Released alongside the M1 Ultra Apple Silicon SOC that sports 20 CPU cores, upward to 64 GPU cores, and up to 128GB of RAM, the Mac Studio is capable of delivering more than performance than all but the most expensive Mac Pro configurations. Simply fifty-fifty if you lot don't spend $v,800+ on the maximum spec, this calculator is the Mac desktop creatives have been hoping Apple would release for a very long time.

It's powerful, it'due south tiny, it's silent, and if you've already got a high-quality monitor, keyboard, and mouse at home, information technology's as well an incredible bargain compared to a similarly specced 14- or sixteen-inch MacBook Pro. A couple of days after last week's announcement a Mac Studio and Studio Display fabricated its way to the DPReview offices for review, and I've been frantically testing this little computer e'er since. Overall, I'm very impressed past what Apple tree has accomplished.

Blueprint, build and usability| Functioning benchmarks | Performance takeaways | Conclusion

Key specifications:

A total "Mac Studio" setup per Apple: the Mac Studio ($three,200), Studio Display ($one,600), a Magic Keyboard ($200), a Magic Trackpad ($150), and a Magic Mouse ($100).

The Mac Studio comes in two principal flavors, M1 Max or M1 Ultra, each with a few possible configurations. The M1 Max variant can exist configured with either 24 or 32 GPU cores, 32 or 64GB of RAM, and between 512GB and 8TB of storage; the M1 Ultra comes with either 48 or 64 GPU cores, 64 or 128GB of RAM, and between 1TB and 8TB of storage.

Nosotros've listed iv potential configurations below to give yous a sense of the full range of specs (and price points) available in this same three.5L aluminum box. If you go along storage the same and just upgrade the CPU, GPU, and/or RAM, you can expect to pay anywhere from $2,200 to $v,800 depending on how much ability you want to clasp out of this tiny trivial computer:

M1 Max 24-cadre M1 Max 32-core M1 Ultra 48-core M1 Ultra 64-core
CPU

M1 Max

10-core CPU

M1 Max

ten-core CPU

M1 Ultra

20-core CPU

M1 Ultra

20-core CPU
GPU

M1 Max

24-core GPU

M1 Max

32-cadre GPU

M1 Ultra

48-cadre GPU

M1 Ultra

64-core GPU
RAM 32GB Unified Memory

64GB Unified Memory

 64GB Unified Memory

128GB Unified Memory
Storage

1TB Integrated NVMe Storage

1TB Integrated NVMe Storage

 1TB Integrated NVMe Storage

1TB Integrated NVMe Storage
Toll

$2,200

$2,800

 $4,000 $5,800

The version we're testing today is an M1 Max variant with a 32-core GPU, 64GB of RAM, and 2TB of storage, which brings the total price up to $iii,200. When you consider that a 16-inch MacBook Pro with identical specs will set you lot dorsum $iv,300, that sounds like a pretty adept deal, but it depends on whether or non y'all already take loftier quality peripherals at home.

The Mac Studio doesn't come with a keyboard or mouse, and if you don't accept a monitor at home, you'll demand ane of those likewise. If you add up the cost of all the products Apple tree sent united states for this review – the Mac Studio, a full-sized Magic Keyboard, a Magic Mouse, a Magic Trackpad, and the base-model Studio Display – the cost of our review unit of measurement goes from $iii,200 to a much steeper $5,250. Bump that Mac Studio upward to an M1 Ultra and yous could spend another $i,200 - $3,000 depending on the variant.

If yous add together up the price of all the products Apple tree sent u.s.a. for this review – the Mac Studio, a keyboard, a mouse, a trackpad, and the base-model Studio Display – the cost of our setup goes from $three,200 to a much steeper $five,250.

None of this means the Mac Studio isn't worth information technology. Pound for pound, Apple tree has packed more performance into this little device than whatever mini-ITX computer you could promise to build at abode. And since most photo and video editors already have an external display, mouse and keyboard at dwelling house, this gets you Apple'southward virtually powerful components without charging you for peripherals you lot already ain. But it's worth keeping the extra costs in mind if you lot're deciding between the Mac Studio and an equivalent MacBook Pro.

Dorsum to top

Design, build and usability

The Mac Studio looks similar a alpine Mac mini with some front I/O.

At that place's not a lot to say about the design or build quality of the Mac Studio. Basically, Apple took the CAD design of the Mac mini, extruded it upward a couple of inches, and chosen it a day. The Mac Studio does include a bit more aluminum instead of the plastic back plate you lot'll detect on the Mac mini, just other than that they're pretty like when you run into them side-by-side.

Overall, I like this minimalist pattern. And while Apple tree might have been able to fit the M1 Max into a slightly smaller version with slightly smaller fans, the ii large fans and the aluminum (M1 Max) or copper (M1 Ultra) caput sink that take up virtually of the iii.5L chassis are and then quiet that I never once heard them over the hum of my nearby appliances, non even during heavy workloads.

In terms of usability, the slightly larger chassis and much more powerful Apple Silicon did requite Apple tree the opportunity to make one major pattern tweak though: they added a bunch of extra ports.

On the back, you go four Thunderbolt 4 ports (40GB/s), an HDMI 2.0 port, two USB Type-A ports (10Gb/southward), a 10 gigabit ethernet port and a "pro audio" jack that can ability high impedance headphones:

On the back of the device, the Mac Studio features iv Thunderbolt iv ports, a x gigabit ethernet port, the ability connector, two USB-A ports, an HDMI 2.0 port, and a "pro audio" jack that tin can drive loftier-impedance headphones.

The inclusion of 10 gigabit ethernet every bit standard is peculiarly noteworthy, considering it enables professional photo and video editors to work on their avails at high speed over the network. That's non relevant for average Joe photo editor, but for professional photo- and video-editing studios, the ability to put all of your source footage or RAW files on an external NAS and admission them at 10 gigabit speeds over the network is a godsend.

The inclusion of x gigabit ethernet as standard is particularly noteworthy, because it enables professional photo and video editors to piece of work on their avails at high speed over the network.

And Apple didn't stop with the ports on the back. Breaking with many years of Apple design tradition, they put extra I/O on the forepart of the device, where y'all'll detect two additional USB Type-C (M1 Max) or Thunderbolt iv (M1 Ultra) ports and a UHS-Two SDXC menu slot.

As an possessor of the M1 Mac mini, I can't express how happy the front I/O makes me. Not just did they throw in an SD card slot, which I still utilize regularly, but I can now charge my wireless peripherals or plug in an SSD without scratching upwards the back of the figurer trying to blindly stab a USB-C cable into one of the gratis Thunderbolt ports.

On the front of the Mac Studio, you lot go an additional two USB Type-C (M1 Max) or Thunderbolt 4 (M1 Ultra) ports, and a UHS-Ii SDXC card slot.

Yes, I wish the HDMI port were 2.1, not 2.0, and it would have been nice to run across a UHS-III or SD Express 7.0 bill of fare reader – all things we've seen on PCs that nosotros've recently reviewed – but overall this is an fantabulous complement of ports that has you lot covered for 95% of all utilise cases. For the last v%, yous can ever go a Thunderbolt dock.

Other than these two small-scale gripes, in that location's really only one major downside to the Mac Studio's design, and that's upgradability...or lack thereof.

This isn't surprising, merely information technology'south disappointing notwithstanding. Given how Apple Silicon is laid out I never expected the RAM to be upgradable, but fifty-fifty a single accessible M.2 slot for storage expandability would have been a massive win in my book. Alas, information technology seems that Apple tree is saving all the expandability for the Mac Pro, so keep that in mind if you're shopping for a Mac Studio: the configuration you buy is the configuration you're stuck with.

Back to top

Operation benchmarks

Even if you opt for the more than affordable M1 Max version of the Mac Studio, this little figurer is capable of incredible photo and video-editing performance.

The M1 Max Mac Studio that Apple sent over is identical to the M1 Max MacBook Pro 16 that we reviewed in November. Apple promised to send an M1 Ultra variant in for testing soon but, in the meantime, we wanted to discover out if Apple was holding annihilation back from these chips on the laptop side.

Does the Mac Studio with an M1 Max, 32-core GPU, and 64GB of RAM perform whatever meliorate than an identical 14- or sixteen-inch MacBook Pro, or is it actually just a matter of preference and price? The reply: there is no significant difference. The Mac Studio and xvi-inch MacBook Pro posted identical numbers in all of our benchmarks, with only a few seconds difference here or there — well inside the margin of error for these kinds of tests.

Every bit such, for today's comparison nosotros decided to test the M1 Max Mac Studio against iii dissimilar computers: a xiv-inch MacBook Pro with a 10-cadre M1 Pro and 32GB of RAM, a Mac mini with a ten-core M1 and 16GB of RAM, and an MSI Creator 17 with an 11th-gen Intel Cadre i9 CPU, NVIDIA RTX 3080 GPU, and 32GB of RAM. Full specs beneath:

M1 Max Mac Studio M1 Pro xiv-inch MacBook Pro M1 Mac mini MSI Creator 17
CPU

M1 Max

x-core CPU

M1 Pro

10-cadre CPU

M1

viii-core CPU

 Intel Core i9-11900H
GPU

M1 Max

32-core GPU

M1 Pro

16-core GPU

M1

8-cadre GPU

NVIDIA RTX 3080

16GB VRAM
RAM 64GB Unified Memory 32GB Unified Retentiveness 16GB Unified Memory 32GB DDR4-3200MHz
Storage 2TB Integrated NVMe Storage 1TB Integrated NVMe Storage 2TB Integrated NVMe Storage 2TB PCIe four.0 M.2 NVMe SSD
Brandish

N/A

14-inch Retina HDR miniLED Brandish

100% DCI-P3

North/A

17-inch 4K HDR miniLED Display

100% DCI-P3
Cost $three,200 $2,900 $1,700 $3,800

Nosotros used these iv computers to run all of our usual benchmarks on the latest versions of Lightroom Classic, Capture One Pro 22, Photoshop, Premiere Pro, and, for the Apple computers, the latest version of Last Cut Pro. These numbers should requite you a sense of the kind of operation y'all can await from this machine compared to some of Apple's other options, and how the Mac Studio compares to a high-powered 17-inch PC laptop.

These numbers should give you a sense of the kind of operation you lot tin can expect from this machine compared to some of Apple'due south other options, and how the Mac Studio compares to a high-powered 17-inch PC laptop.

Unfortunately, nosotros don't have a comparable desktop PC in-business firm that we tin examination against the Mac Studio, but we're working on information technology and hope to have something around to test by the time Apple sends over the M1 Ultra version of the Mac Studio sometime in the adjacent few weeks. The most appropriate comparison would be the beastly Intel NUC 12 Extreme, so Intel, if you're reading this, accomplish out and testify us what y'all've got!

We've got an unused RTX 3080 only sitting here in our studio, waiting for the right rig.

Adobe Lightroom Classic

For Lightroom Archetype, nosotros run two different benchmarks using 100 copies of the studio scene test photograph from 4 different cameras: the Canon EOS R6, the Nikon Z7 II, the Sony a7R Four, and the Fujifilm GFX 100. For our offset criterion, we examination how long information technology takes to import each set of 100 RAW files and generate 1:ane previews. For our 2nd benchmark, we apply a custom preset and export each set of 100 RAW files as full-size, 100% quality JPEGs.

Generally speaking, Lightroom Classic import and preview generation tracks raw CPU performance and isn't significantly afflicted by the amount of RAM or the number of GPU cores. That'southward pretty much what we encounter here. The Mac mini with just 4 performance cores is the slowest of the bunch, while the other three computers post very like numbers across the board. The MSI Creator 17 does manage to pull ahead with a more than pregnant margin in one case we get to the 100MP Fujifilm files, though.

Canon EOS R6 Import Nikon Z7 II Import Sony a7R IV Import Fujifilm GFX 100 Import
Mac Studio i:26 2:19 ii:24 half dozen:02
MacBook Pro ane:24 two:18 2:24 6:01
Mac mini i:59 3:37 3:53 8:57
MSI Creator 17 1:23 2:17 2:32 v:31

For exports, the amount and speed of RAM congenital into your system begins to play a role, allowing the Mac Studio to pull alee of the pack... but not by much. Both the Mac Studio and MacBook Pro are much faster than the Creator 17 and especially the Mac mini, but the difference betwixt the M1 Max and M1 Pro is much smaller than nosotros expected given that the Mac Studio has twice the RAM.

It goes to testify that your powerful, expensive hardware is really but as expert as the software you're using. If the software isn't optimized to take full advantage of extra cores or more GPU power or more RAM, you lot're out of luck:

Catechism EOS R6 Export Nikon Z7 Ii Consign Sony a7R 4 Export Fujifilm GFX 100 Export
Mac Studio 2:28 v:xviii six:45 eleven:16
MacBook Pro 2:33 five:29 6:51 11:39
Mac mini iv:16 ix:17 sixteen:01 forty:21
MSI Creator 17 iii:32 seven:42 9:52 20:nineteen

Capture One Pro 22

To test Capture One Pro functioning, nosotros run the exact same import and export benchmarks every bit Lightroom Classic, with i exception: previews are generated at the default 2560px, since in that location is no 1:1 option. Capture I is much faster than Lightroom for both of these tasks, equally it relies heavily on the GPU to accelerate both import and export.

At import, there'southward basically no difference between the three Macs. Whatever is happening behind the scenes, Capture One isn't taking advantage of the extra RAM , CPU, or GPU horsepower between the M1, M1 Pro, and M1 Max. The MSI Creator 17 pulls alee here, thanks to its beefy NVIDIA RTX 3080:

Canon EOS R6 Import Nikon Z7 Two Import Sony a7R IV Import Fujifilm GFX 100 Import
Mac Studio 00:43 1:03 one:17 2:04
MacBook Pro 00:42 1:03 one:17 2:03
Mac mini 00:44 i:05 ane:18 two:01
MSI Creator 17 00:40 00:56 1:08 1:39

Finally, when we get to Capture One Exports, the extra GPU cores and RAM within the Mac Studio start to generate some noticeable improvements in performance. Combining 64GB of super fast LPDDR5 unified memory with 32 GPU cores allows the M1 Max Mac Studio to pull way ahead of the other computers, leaving even the MSI Creator 17 in the grit.

The ability to export 100 fully edited 100MP Fujifilm GFX 100 RAW files in simply four minutes and 30 seconds is pretty impressive if you ask me:

Canon EOS R6 Export Nikon Z7 2 Export Sony a7R IV Export Fujifilm GFX 100 Consign
Mac Studio 00:57 ii:07 2:33 4:30
MacBook Pro ane:eleven 2:52 3:32 6:43
Mac mini 2:06 v:22 6:40 12:20
MSI Creator 17 1:31 three:thirteen 3:55 6:23

Adobe Photoshop

The final photography benchmark nosotros run is Puget Systems' popular Puget Bench benchmark. We run a slightly older version of the benchmark (v0.8) because it was the last one to include a PhotoMerge test. Information technology's also a script, not a plugin, which allows us to run it on Apple Silicon Macs without relying on the Intel-based version of Photoshop.

As you can meet, the Mac Studio cleans house. Every unmarried score, including the GPU category score, is the highest nosotros've seen. That'south particularly impressive when you consider that the MSI Creator 17 boasts an RTX 3080 that soaks up 95W of power at full load and has 16GB of its ain VRAM. It's non an apples to apples comparison (pun intended) considering the GPU score is based on tests that rely on more than raw GPU performance, but it'south still an impressive win for Apple:

Overall Full general GPU Filter PhotoMerge
Mac Studio 1287.2 129.ii 117.5 111.five 162.2
MacBook Pro 1218.seven 124.viii 108.0 100.iii 159.1
Mac mini 1035.6 103.1 87.3 83.4 144.8
MSI Creator 17 1030.v 111.7 113.1 85.eight 120.three

Adobe Premiere Pro and Final Cut Pro

In Adobe Premiere Pro and Last Cutting Pro, we use the same 4K timeline made up of 8K Sony a1 exam footage, consummate with color grading and multiple layered effects. The footage is rendered, and so we export a master file, H.264 file, and HEVC/H.265 file. The target chip rate is adjusted to proceed the output identical between the two programs.

Finally, every bit a last test, we also run Warp Stabilize and Final Cut's congenital-in stabilization feature on a 15-2d clip from this aforementioned video shoot.

You tin sentinel the video used in these benchmarks below:

The Mac Studio's Premiere Pro performance is excellent. Ever since Adobe ramped upwards hardware acceleration and released their Apple Silicon optimized version of this app, the return and consign times nosotros've seen from the M1 Pro and M1 Max accept been faster than annihilation else nosotros've tested.

And not just a petty faster, we're talking twice as fast. Comparison the Mac Studio to the MSI Creator 17, render and consign times are 51% faster across the board:

Return All Export Master File Export H.264 Consign HEVC/H.265 Warp Stabilize
Mac Studio one:47 00:03 ane:41 1:40 2:thirteen
MacBook Pro 3:04 00:12 ii:57 3:01 2:thirteen
Mac mini 7:29 00:11 8:17 7:47 2:24
MSI Creator 17 iii:forty 00:11 3:26 3:25 2:32

What's more than, the Mac Studio is actually faster in Premiere Pro than Final Cut Pro. The same footage cut into the same timeline using (to the extent information technology was possible) identical effects is 35% faster to render and 28% faster to consign into H.264. The only exam where Terminal Cutting was faster is encoding an 8-fleck HEVC file, which is 34% faster in Apple'south software.

Return All Export Master File Export H.264 Export HEVC/H.265 Final Cutting Stabilize
Mac Studio 2:45 00:44 ii:21 i:06 00:24
MacBook Pro 3:05 00:46 3:09 1:31 00:23
Mac mini 4:47 one:22 4:19 1:54 00:24

Performance Takeaways

Given that we already reviewed a 16-inch MacBook Pro with identical specs, yous might think at that place's not much to have away from these results, but I'd beg to differ. Get-go, the very fact that the Mac Studio with an M1 Max and 64GB of RAM performs identically to a sixteen-inch MBP with the aforementioned specs ways that Apple isn't property anything back in the laptops. You're non going to sacrifice performance if you choose to go with a MacBook Pro, it's genuinely a thing of preference.

Second, now that we've been able to compare an M1 Max-powered figurer to the more affordable M1 Pro, it shows which uses will (and won't) benefit from the more than powerful processor, twice the RAM, and twice the graphics cores. For many photographers in particular, an M1 Pro-powered MacBook Pro with 32GB of RAM is going to be more than than powerful enough.

For many photographers in item, an M1 Pro-powered MacBook Pro with 32GB of RAM is going to be more than powerful enough.

Third, these numbers signal out an intriguing pigsty in Apple's line-up: there is no M1 Pro desktop. For creatives who don't need a laptop and aren't interested in the actress RAM and GPU cores offered past the M1 Max and M1 Ultra, a more affordable Mac Studio with an M1 Pro would be an incredibly intriguing value proposition that would probably unseat the M1 Mac mini as the best value in the Apple ecosystem. We've got our fingers crossed.

Finally, and it has to be asked. Given the performance higher up, is in that location any reason to spend the extra $1,200 to $three,000 on an M1 Ultra variant of the Mac Studio other than maybe "future proofing" your investment? In that location are definitely employ-cases that can benefit from twice the GPU cores and twice the RAM – and we will definitely exist testing the M1 Ultra but as shortly as Apple can go one to us – merely for the vast majority of users, anything more than powerful (and expensive) than the M1 Max is probably beyond the bespeak of diminishing returns.

Back to acme

The Apple tree desktop (near) creators take been waiting for

Apple managed to pack a ton of power into this tiny lilliputian computer.
What Nosotros Similar What Nosotros Don't Like
  • Incredible performance in a tiny iii.5L package
  • Front end-facing ports are extremely useful
  • Tons of I/O on the back, including ii USB-A ports and 10 gigabit ethernet
  • Totally silent, even under heavy load
  • No upgradable components
  • Keyboard and mouse not included
  • The HDMI port is HDMI 2.0, not 2.1
  • The SD card slot is UHS-II, non UHS-III
  • All the same expensive if you demand to buy peripherals

Lovers of the iMac will exist disappointed that Apple seems to have discontinued the 27-inch iMac in favor of the Mac Studio and Studio Display, but for nigh creatives, I think this is a win. Almost of u.s. don't need a display, keyboard, mouse, speakers, mic, or webcam, but we might want the power and performance that comes with a high-end Apple Silicon device. Now, we can get that without paying for all the other stuff.

For $2,200 you can purchase yourself a Mac Studio with M1 Max, 24-core GPU, 32GB of RAM and 1TB of storage, hook information technology up to your existing photograph editing setup, and experience ane of the fastest photograph- and video-editing rigs that Apple has ever released.

The Mac Studio is precisely the computer that many of use were hoping Apple would release: a "professional" Mac desktop with tons of power and lots of ports, that still takes upward less room on your desk than a gallon of milk.

I can't requite the Mac Studio 5 stars. The fact that you can't upgrade whatever of the components disqualifies it, and Apple left out some nice-to-haves like HDMI 2.1... or a mouse and keyboard. Merely if you can overlook these omissions, the Mac Studio is precisely the figurer that many of use were hoping Apple would release: a "professional" Mac desktop with tons of power and lots of ports, that all the same takes upwards less room on your desk-bound than a gallon of milk.

Back to top