193,853 users have contributed to 42,898 threads and 257,860 posts.
In the past 24 hours, we have 4 new thread(s), 15 new post(s) and 88 new user(s).
I'm in the same predicament. Do you think Mac Studio M2 Max (cheaper model) with, say:
would be able to handle large symphonic libraries? I understand the M2 Ultra CPU would be faster, but this means twice as much cash approximately. In that sense, I guess the question is, in your opinion, how well M2 Max would handle large libraries as per specs above?
Many thanks in advance.
I
Do not forget to have a look from time to time to the Refurb Store from Apple, you can get good opportunities
If you can upgrade the memory and the internal M2 SSD outside of Apple it's a good deal
I have practice this solution many time, My Mac Pro 5.1 is still running
VSL VI is not too much cpu greedy ; but you need a lot of memory (64GB is confortable) and fast internal M2 SSD to handle a large 100 tracks VSL orchestra. this using Logic Pro and my 2019 Mac Pro
@Igzy said in [Mac Studio 2023](/post/317293):
I understand the M2 Ultra CPU would be faster, but this means twice as much cash approximately. In that sense, I guess the question is, in your opinion, how well M2 Max would handle large libraries as per specs above?
Many thanks in advance.
I
@Stu-Daddy said in [Mac Studio 2023](/post/317365):
It works beautifully I wish now that I had gotten the 8TB ssd though
This is what I am wrestling with. I want to max out a Mac Studio and am wondering if the internal drives make a huge difference. I currently have an iMac Pro that I maxed out except for the internal drives and I'm running a lot of samples and plugins and it's starting to choke a little. The internal ssd on the Studio are pricey but I'm using the iMac Pro as an all in one (no external slaves). The m2 Ultra 60 core with at least 128 of ram (maybe even going 192gb) should be a beast. I'm thinking about future proofing myself for at least 5 years so getting the 8tb of storage to house my samples is very temping. Not a fan of tons of external drives for a lot of reasons. Is that why you wish you got the 8tb ssd?
There's no doubt in my mind that the M2 Ultra's internal storage has a big advantage in speed over any kind of external storage available today. But then the question of just how much of an advantage that turns out to be in terms of resulting RAM (and perhaps CPU) economy for midistration applications remains frustratingly obscure.
Apple quote only RAM bandwidth – a staggeringly fast 800 GB/s in the M2 Studio Ultra – with not a word on internal storage speed. We do know from a few user lab tests of earlier M1 MBP and M1 Mac Studio that internal storage speed was phenomenal - in certain cases much faster than a Thunderbolt 4 port can handle. But also, it seems Apple have being playing tunes with their choices of storage devices in various M1 Mac models - some later devices being significantly slower than the fastest early devices. My guess is that the tradeoff Apple is quietly struggling to optimise has a lot to do with build-cost versus so-called "virtual memory" performance, primarily in video editing applications. But let's not forget that for realtime applications - including midistration - virtual memory is not an effective workaround for lack of RAM, even in the M2 Ultra Studio. At best, virtual memory can only relieve marginal shortages of RAM in offline (i.e. non-realtime) work.
(Virtual memory uses storage instead of RAM whenever the system runs out of available RAM, and can be, up to a point, pretty much transparent in video editing, but much less so in midistration applications. I recall when our large VAX 11/780 cluster regularly drove hundreds of our software engineers into sulky frustration because our corporation - believing DEC's hype about virtual memory - had been stingy about buying RAM and so the VAX cluster often went too deep into slooow virtual memory!)
I'm waiting to hear from anyone who's used a very large midistration template in a very large production on an M2 Ultra Studio - specifically about total RAM usage reported by MacOS. But since I've seen up to around 50 GB RAM usage in my 6 year old 64 GB system, and because the price difference between 64 GB and 128 GB RAM isn't too colossal (currently £800), I'll be going for the 128 GB option.
As for internal storage options, I'd be wanting 8 TB. That's because currently my libraries are pushing 5 TB of external SSD, and on top of that I use 2 TB total for dual-bootable MacOS & applications-dedicated R/W SSD storage. (For printing audio and for backing up, coupling externally to today's fast, LARGE-capacity spinning-platter hard drives - e.g. Lacie D2 - will do nicely.)
Above all, I want BIG and FAST realtime sample streaming without slaves! And I believe the time for that has arrived thanks to the M2 Ultra Studio.
So all told, I'd be looking at forking out an extra £3000 for my preferred RAM and storage options; total:- £7200. OUCH!
That is my gut to spend the money and get the internal 8tb and probably max out the RAM as well. I also do some video work so being able to comfortably handle that as well is a plus.
I think the 60 cores M2 Ultra chip is plenty. I don't think 16 more cores buys me as much as internal storage and RAM.
Thanks for the info. Makes me feel a little more confident in the choice.
Thank you! That was my feeling.
I have close to 2tb of samples from VSL and then all the rest of my samples from everyone else (I think it qualifies as an addiction at this point) so I think I'd take up 3tb for samples.
I think you just confirmed my order detail for the Mac Studio. Hate spending the money but I know what a difference it will make. Appreciate your input StuDaddy!
