did anyone compare mac studio m1 max or ultra to a 2013 12 core trashcan?
I own a 64gb, 12 core trashcan and i am wondering if i will see a huge increase in performance if i buy a m1 max with 32gb ram.
The plugins, libraries, vst instruments and all going on in my sessions, channel count etc i can easily stress the trashcan....its still doing a good job but might be the right time to sell before its worth nothing. And if the m1s are that powerfull, with Universal Audio going also native, i could even sell my uad tbunderbolt octo satellite.
It depends a lot on exactly what you're doing. Running under Rosetta, I'd expect you'd see a noticeable improvement for playback of large sessions when comparing to a 12 core trashcan. You'll see significant improvement of single core performance with Rosetta. Running native however, the M1 will run rings around the trashcan. A lot of the major DAWs are apple silicon native now, and with DAWs like Logic, you can mix native and rosetta. My trashcan has been retired from my studio.did anyone compare mac studio m1 max or ultra to a 2013 12 core trashcan?
I own a 64gb, 12 core trashcan and i am wondering if i will see a huge increase in performance if i buy a m1 max with 32gb ram.
Relevant:
TL;DR: The Studio is probably going to be better. You might have problems with things not working on Apple Silicon.
Side note: I've basically come down on not being able to support Apple with how much they oppose right to repair and a handful of other things. But, the M1s really are impressive computers if you don't have those problems.
Fair enough.Saw this one, still thanks.....close call but his trashcan is a quad. I am trying to figure out if the m1 10 core would have a significant multi core performance improvement compared to my 12 core xeon cpu. Or if it would be a drawback since it has 2 cores less.
The ARM cores run circles around the x86_64 cores, generally. Much, much shorter pipelines in the architecture.Saw this one, still thanks.....close call but his trashcan is a quad. I am trying to figure out if the m1 10 core would have a significant multi core performance improvement compared to my 12 core xeon cpu. Or if it would be a drawback since it has 2 cores less.
i think you said smth good about m1 too technical for me...is my trashcan x86-64 ?The ARM cores run circles around the x86_64 cores, generally. Much, much shorter pipelines in the architecture.
I've been absolutely gobsmacked by this M1-based MBPro I got for work. Apple did a good thing jumping to ARM. Took guts to buck the x86_64 incumbent, but absolutely amazing results here.
Yeah....that's what I'm talking about.The ARM cores run circles around the x86_64 cores, generally. Much, much shorter pipelines in the architecture.
I've been absolutely gobsmacked by this M1-based MBPro I got for work. Apple did a good thing jumping to ARM. Took guts to buck the x86_64 incumbent, but absolutely amazing results here.
Yeah, it is.i think you said smth good about m1 too technical for me...is my trashcan x86-64 ?
The ARM cores run circles around the x86_64 cores, generally. Much, much shorter pipelines in the architecture.
I've been absolutely gobsmacked by this M1-based MBPro I got for work. Apple did a good thing jumping to ARM. Took guts to buck the x86_64 incumbent, but absolutely amazing results here.
Rosetta is just an interim solution. They’re dragging two support balls and chains with it and as long as it’s available, and developers don’t step up with the M1 coded versions of their apps, the true speed of the machine won’t be seen.You're right...all apps will need to be AS native eventually. At some point Apple will remove Rosetta from MacOS.
i run cubase pro 12, with bunch of vst instruments, uad, fabfilter etc plugins and have eucon/avid controllers/multiple tablets hooked up. If this gives an idea...Same here. I ran a bunch of music production benchmarks when I first got my M1, comparing it to my 2013 MacPro. The M1 was better in every way, even when running under Rosetta. I also compared it to newer Intel cpu's and again the M1 was better in every respect. The only possible situation where I can imagine the MacPro being better would be for running Windows with Bootcamp or Parallels. The bottom line: my MacPro is now in storage in the attic .
However, unFiltered is asking if he'll see a "huge" difference. Without knowing what he means by "huge" or what specifically he's using the Mac for, that's impossible for anyone except him to answer.
P.S. The silent and cool operation of the M1 is a huge benefit in a studio.
Yea, true. Though I'll say this: anything that's ARM64 native is screaming fast and doesn't push the cores or the fans on this MBPro for me. If you end up having to use Rosetta for instruction set translation you won't enjoy the ARM64 chips nearly as much I suspect.It's not a clear "this is better", though it very well may be a "this is better for me".
From what I've seen, Rosetta 2 is actually really good compared to other ways of doing that translation.Yea, true. Though I'll say this: anything that's ARM64 native is screaming fast and doesn't push the cores or the fans on this MBPro for me. If you end up having to use Rosetta for instruction set translation you won't enjoy the ARM64 chips nearly as much I suspect.
IMHO, that's the important big picture issue here. You can pick nits about whether a $699 MacMini outperforms (for music production) a multi-thousand dollar water-cooled i9 rig that sounds like a blast furnace in your studio, but what's striking is the performance trajectory of Apple Silicon vs. Intel product lines. When it comes to performance for things that matter in music production, Apple seems to be making more progress year over year than Intel/AMD.And it’s just the starting point.
Yep.IMHO, that's the important big picture issue here. You can pick nits about whether a $699 MacMini outperforms a multi-thousand dollar water-cooled i9 rig that sounds like a blast furnace in a music production studio, but what's striking is the performance trajectory of Apple Silicon vs. Intel product lines. When it comes to performance for things that matter in music production, Apple seems to be making more progress year over year than Intel/AMD.
I'm not.And, once again, I'm sure the nay-sayers are forecasting doom for Apple. Yeah… right…. Again.
I think we'll see an M1 replacement for the Pro at some point. But not this year is my prediction.If they make an M1 desktop that can be repaired, has PCIe slots, and uses off the shelf RAM and SSDs, I'll consider going back.
man this helps so much with the decision, first hand information and seems like our setup was similar if not the same....thank you!Same here. I ran a bunch of music production benchmarks when I first got my M1, comparing it to my 2013 MacPro. The M1 was better in every way, even when running under Rosetta. I also compared it to newer Intel cpu's and again the M1 was better in every respect. The only possible situation where I can imagine the MacPro being better would be for running Windows with Bootcamp or Parallels. The bottom line: my MacPro is now in storage in the attic .
However, unFiltered is asking if he'll see a "huge" difference. Without knowing what he means by "huge" or what specifically he's using the Mac for, that's impossible for anyone except him to answer.
P.S. The silent and cool operation of the M1 is a huge benefit in a studio.
I think we'll see an M1 replacement for the Pro at some point. But not this year is my prediction.
There's demand enough for a very, very high end system that can accommodate PCIe cards and run macOS.
Apple said in late 2020 they'd turn over the entire product line within 2 years. Only the MacPro remains. I would guess we'll see it in the fall.I think we'll see an M1 replacement for the Pro at some point. But not this year is my prediction.
There's demand enough for a very, very high end system that can accommodate PCIe cards and run macOS.