p.4 #1 · New Apple Studio Machines-Which one for LR/Photoshop with Sony A7RV?
DWOfPaul wrote:
AI is more about GPU cores than CPU cores. The M4 Max has 40 GPU cores and the M4 Pro has 20 GPU cores. So, in theory, the M4 Max is more future proof for AI tasks. (AI is all over the place currently, so it's hard to know for sure where hardware and software will be in a few years. For example will most AI software become cloud based)
Apple Silicon has a dedicated block for AI called the Neural Engine. The M4, M4 Pro, and M4 Max all have the same Neural Engine. The Ultra gets two of these, but the M4 Neural Engine is more than twice as fast as the M3's--another reason the M3 Ultra doesn't make much sense.
p.4 #2 · New Apple Studio Machines-Which one for LR/Photoshop with Sony A7RV?
QuietOC wrote:
Apple Silicon has a dedicated block for AI called the Neural Engine. The M4, M4 Pro, and M4 Max all have the same Neural Engine. The Ultra gets two of these, but the M4 Neural Engine is more than twice as fast as the M3's--another reason the M3 Ultra doesn't make much sense.
Most of the stuff we’re doing with AI is going to be largely GPU dependent. Folks really need to dig in before commenting with broad statements like that. The Neural engine tools are also proprietary to Apple and opaque to developers…reason Adobe still hasn’t been able to use them for the AI denoise.
p.4 #3 · New Apple Studio Machines-Which one for LR/Photoshop with Sony A7RV?
aman74 wrote:
Most of the stuff we’re doing with AI is going to be largely GPU dependent. Folks really need to dig in before commenting with broad statements like that. The Neural engine tools are also proprietary to Apple and opaque to developers…reason Adobe still hasn’t been able to use them for the AI denoise.
Somehow Geekbench is able to use the dedicated hardware. Adobe is Adobe.
p.4 #4 · New Apple Studio Machines-Which one for LR/Photoshop with Sony A7RV?
At a very high level, not all AI models can be run on Apple's Neural Engine. Apple's CoreML supports a subset of AI models and then decides how to run that model between the CPU, GPU, and ANE. For example, some parts of the network may be able to use the ANE, but other parts might not and will run on the GPU.
p.4 #6 · New Apple Studio Machines-Which one for LR/Photoshop with Sony A7RV?
I am actually about to upgrade to the New M3 Ultra studio-
For the first time in my Studio's history, I ran out of memory
8K video export from FCP, while editing photos in Lightroom. If you do photo editing only, the base studio is about as good as it gets. Now with more RAM and processing power, its a beast of a machine!!
p.4 #7 · New Apple Studio Machines-Which one for LR/Photoshop with Sony A7RV?
I was going to pass but we've had a computer failing at work, it's a 5-year old AMD 64-core Threadripper with an Nvidia RTX 4080 GPU. One of the primary tasks we use it for is image stacking for our studio macro shots using Helicon Focus. None of the stacking apps have a native CUDA implementation or even a native Metal implementation so they all use the older OpenCL approach. I decided to test that stacking on my M2 Ultra and compare to the 4080 and the M2 beats it out. The M4 Max beats it even more handily. Given that, I fully expect the M3 Ultra to be extremely fast at this task as it's heavily GPU dependent, and the GPU on the M3 is much improved over the M2. The second component of this process is exporting hundreds of images to DNG or TIFF before stacking; for this task the CPU cores do really count so that made me lean towards the Ultra.
So, I've ordered a M3 Ultra with the 32-core CPU and 80-core GPU with 96GB of RAM and a 1TB drive. I'll run everything off of external TB drives so no need to put much storage internally, and 96GB of RAM will be plenty for the tasks this machine will be doing. I will do some comparisons to my M4 Max MBP when it comes in. I don't expect it to perform hugely faster than the M4 Max as the core clock speed is higher on the M4, but for the large batch tasks it will be used for the increased CPU and GPU core counts will be very helpful.
I will say I'm still mildly disappointed they didn't release an M4 version. I think they will do so in a new Mac Pro this summer at WWDC. They were widely panned for releasing the first AS Mac Pro with the same M2 Ultra as the Studio, so there was no real product differentiation at all apart from the ability to put PCIe cards in the Pro. I can see them keeping the top speed newest Ultra only for the Mac Pro, but I guess we'll see soon enough.
p.4 #8 · New Apple Studio Machines-Which one for LR/Photoshop with Sony A7RV?
jhapeman wrote:
I was going to pass but we've had a computer failing at work, it's a 5-year old AMD 64-core Threadripper with an Nvidia RTX 4080 GPU. One of the primary tasks we use it for is image stacking for our studio macro shots using Helicon Focus. None of the stacking apps have a native CUDA implementation or even a native Metal implementation so they all use the older OpenCL approach. I decided to test that stacking on my M2 Ultra and compare to the 4080 and the M2 beats it out. The M4 Max beats it even more handily. Given that, I fully expect the M3 Ultra to be extremely fast at this task as it's heavily GPU dependent, and the GPU on the M3 is much improved over the M2. The second component of this process is exporting hundreds of images to DNG or TIFF before stacking; for this task the CPU cores do really count so that made me lean towards the Ultra.
So, I've ordered a M3 Ultra with the 32-core CPU and 80-core GPU with 96GB of RAM and a 1TB drive. I'll run everything off of external TB drives so no need to put much storage internally, and 96GB of RAM will be plenty for the tasks this machine will be doing. I will do some comparisons to my M4 Max MBP when it comes in. I don't expect it to perform hugely faster than the M4 Max as the core clock speed is higher on the M4, but for the large batch tasks it will be used for the increased CPU and GPU core counts will be very helpful.
I will say I'm still mildly disappointed they didn't release an M4 version. I think they will do so in a new Mac Pro this summer at WWDC. They were widely panned for releasing the first AS Mac Pro with the same M2 Ultra as the Studio, so there was no real product differentiation at all apart from the ability to put PCIe cards in the Pro. I can see them keeping the top speed newest Ultra only for the Mac Pro, but I guess we'll see soon enough. ...Show more →
Nice machine!
With apologies for going off-topic, there’s one thing I’d like to ask about the application you use. When I bought an M3 Max just over a year ago, I tried to compile some of my old OpenCL-based code, but could not — I could not get it to compile for Apple silicon using whichever version of the operating system the laptop came with (Sonoma?). That was enough of a reason to persuade me to convert the code from OpenCL to Metal, so I must confess I didn’t spend much time trying to get the OpenCL version to compile.
But I would very be interested to know how you got the app to work on your M2 Ultra and, in particular, with what MacOS version. Did something specific have to be done to force the compiler to compile OpenCL code for the M2? (I suppose it’s possible that you were using an earlier version of MacOS, though.)
By the way, according to one or two reports I’ve seen, it sounds like there may not be an M4 Ultra at all. Apparently Apple have said that not all M chips will have an Ultra version, and the M4 is supposedly lacking the ‘fusion’ connector that enables two Maxes to be combined to form an Ultra. This doesn’t necessarily mean that there won’t be an M4 Ultra, but it may be a clue.
p.4 #9 · New Apple Studio Machines-Which one for LR/Photoshop with Sony A7RV?
I have enjoyed following this thread, thank you, particularly as I am deliberating on the replacement of a 6-y.o. Intel iMac.
I get the argument shared here by many of you, about not buying the "biggest and best" 'cause that is what we are always tempted to do. I have been buying PCs since they were invented -- the Apple II, the IBM PC, the Lisa, the Mac etc. I have always opted for something bigger than basic simply to future proof against new developments over the cycle of ownership.
Now, though, my existing iMac can easily continue to do nearly everything I ask, every day, good as new. For most tasks, we have passed the threshold where future-proofing was necessary.
AI may change that, of course, but second-guessing which way AI will develop next is tough to do right now. As someone said above "AI is all over the place at the moment".
The one task which is just too slow is editing with LRC. I don't mean for the import/export tasks used in the benchmarks. I'm happy to go and make another cup of tea while that happens. I mean for interactive tasks like placing a mask accurately, where LRC cannot keep up with the cursor movement. Or viewing edited files in full screen. Each picture takes 5-15 seconds to load, as the edits are all applied to generate the full screen version.
Are those challenges alone worth the upgrade, and if so, what upgrade would be sufficient? None of the benchmarks I have seen look at that aspect of performance.
p.4 #10 · New Apple Studio Machines-Which one for LR/Photoshop with Sony A7RV?
I mean - even the M2 Studio Max shouldn’t exhibit stutter during editing/masking. My old M2 Mac Mini base model rarely stuttered (though with enough complex layers, I could eventually get it to). Loading initial raw image previews however, was slow on that M2 Mac Mini. Full size views of edits were always pretty snappy.
With the new M4 machines, stuttering performance during edits is largely solved, hence why no one is benchmarking it (there’s nothing to time). I haven’t had any interruptions in editing, and raw previews are instant. The performance improvements of the current M4 machines compared to Intel Macs is quite significant.
p.4 #11 · New Apple Studio Machines-Which one for LR/Photoshop with Sony A7RV?
rob_ww wrote:
The one task which is just too slow is editing with LRC. I don't mean for the import/export tasks used in the benchmarks. I'm happy to go and make another cup of tea while that happens. I mean for interactive tasks like placing a mask accurately, where LRC cannot keep up with the cursor movement. Or viewing edited files in full screen. Each picture takes 5-15 seconds to load, as the edits are all applied to generate the full screen version.
Are those challenges alone worth the upgrade, and if so, what upgrade would be sufficient? None of the benchmarks I have seen look at that aspect of performance....Show more →
Until last year I was running a medium-high spec 5K iMac (Intel 3.6GHz i9/32GB RAM/4GB graphics) with my LR library stored on internal SSD and all my photos on external Thunderbolt SSDs. I was frustrated with the same delays you mention, but it was tolerable. Even using Topaz was manageable, because I'd walk away while it worked. But when AI noise reduction came to Lightroom, making its use a one-click operation, it really started to bother me. (ie applying denoise to a single 61mpx image would take 60-80 seconds; it really got to be a drag when I selected 20-30 shots to process.)
So after much soul-searching, reading here, and digging in the couch cushions for funds, I decided it was time for an upgrade.
I selected a M2 Max Studio/64GB. It made a stunning difference. Denoise now takes less than 20 seconds per image, and the annoying 'loading' time when switching images in down to a blink. Batch exports are at least 4x faster.
My recommendation to anyone in a similar situation is this:
• If you're coming from an Intel-based Mac, any of the Apple Silicon machines are a huge upgrade, especially for optimized apps, like Adobe.
• When choosing which particular machine, pay attention to the ports and their specs. If you keep the Mac for several years (I usually keep mine 4-5) then the external storage speeds may be important later in its life. When I bought my Studio, I missed the fact that only the rear ports are 40gbps; the front ports are only 10gbps. If I had realized, I might have pushed my budget to get the Ultra instead. Likewise, the new Minis have a mix of port speeds, depending on the model/configuration.
• Personally I'd still pick a Studio over the new Mini. But as I said, any of these new machines will be a big upgrade if you're coming from Intel.
p.4 #12 · New Apple Studio Machines-Which one for LR/Photoshop with Sony A7RV?
It's funny to see the long time Intel users, be it windows or mac, not understand the difference that Apple Silicone makes. Paper specs mean nothing anymore.
The M1 took my 30 years of assumptions born out of building PCs and threw it out the window. Absolutely no desire to go back to bigger, weaker, louder, hotter, slower machines. The Studio is one of the finest pieces of tech I've ever spent money on.
p.4 #13 · New Apple Studio Machines-Which one for LR/Photoshop with Sony A7RV?
Andrew CD wrote:
Nice machine!
With apologies for going off-topic, there’s one thing I’d like to ask about the application you use. When I bought an M3 Max just over a year ago, I tried to compile some of my old OpenCL-based code, but could not — I could not get it to compile for Apple silicon using whichever version of the operating system the laptop came with (Sonoma?). That was enough of a reason to persuade me to convert the code from OpenCL to Metal, so I must confess I didn’t spend much time trying to get the OpenCL version to compile.
But I would very be interested to know how you got the app to work on your M2 Ultra and, in particular, with what MacOS version. Did something specific have to be done to force the compiler to compile OpenCL code for the M2? (I suppose it’s possible that you were using an earlier version of MacOS, though.)
By the way, according to one or two reports I’ve seen, it sounds like there may not be an M4 Ultra at all. Apparently Apple have said that not all M chips will have an Ultra version, and the M4 is supposedly lacking the ‘fusion’ connector that enables two Maxes to be combined to form an Ultra. This doesn’t necessarily mean that there won’t be an M4 Ultra, but it may be a clue.
It's not my code/app so I can't comment on that. I use Helicon Focus. They have to recompile almost every time Apple releases a MacOS update to make it work correctly with OpenCL. Myself and others have asked them about a native Metal version but they seem to not have that in the plans. They are located in Ukraine so I cut them some slack.
As for the "no M4 Ultra" they all said that about the M3 as well. The die X-rays showed no fusion connector there either. I think Apple can slap these things together in custom formats. For example the M3 also didn't have TB5 and now it does.
p.4 #14 · New Apple Studio Machines-Which one for LR/Photoshop with Sony A7RV?
So when I got the Mac M4 Pro mini I also grabbed a T5 hub which you can do with either system . I had to with the Mini because im a pig . I have 5 External Drives hooked up to it with monitor also going to the system so that's 6 Ports plus off the monitor port for a Time Machine drive. So I did grab a T5 Hub and it works really well and not that bad in Price either at 189 dollars . It does NOT get hot just slightly warm as expected
My only issue I have just because I maxed it out completely is My OWC Type B Card reader. If in use I have to pull a drive off. Not a big deal and I probably have 1 too many externals anyway.
p.4 #15 · New Apple Studio Machines-Which one for LR/Photoshop with Sony A7RV?
Also there are T5 External Enclosures out now . I grabbed one of them of 200 dollars and a Samsung 990 Pro 4TB drive to put in it so total was 500 bucks for a drive that its reads/writes are over 5600 which is flying. Either system you get you can do this for external drives or get a OWC 4 TB externals enclosure for 130 dollars and put in a 4tb drive for like 3900 speeds . I made 3 of them
p.4 #16 · New Apple Studio Machines-Which one for LR/Photoshop with Sony A7RV?
RoamingScott wrote:
It's funny to see the long time Intel users, be it windows or mac, not understand the difference that Apple Silicone makes. Paper specs mean nothing anymore.
The M1 took my 30 years of assumptions born out of building PCs and threw it out the window. Absolutely no desire to go back to bigger, weaker, louder, hotter, slower machines. The Studio is one of the finest pieces of tech I've ever spent money on.
100% this. And in a laptop they are even more mind-blowing as you get identical performance for 99% of what you do as you get from a Studio or a Mac Mini. You have to push huge batch edits of hundreds of images to get the laptop fans to spin and and to see any throttling takes even bigger jobs.
p.4 #17 · New Apple Studio Machines-Which one for LR/Photoshop with Sony A7RV?
Its funny on the Mac mini 4 Pro I kept hearing and or reading the fans would go nuts and I have yet to even hear them and im batch processing thousands of images at once. Just kinda odd. Im sure it is working but no real signs of it with noise. My M3 laptop the fans certainly go nuts but im not using that much for processing but more presentation stuff.
Be careful what you're reading too , people tend to exaggerate these issues.
If did not go to the Mini a few months ago I would go with the Max Studio version but Im certainly doing really well with this unit. It's a tough call choosing . If you do the hard drives correctly you save a lot of money and that may help money wise getting the Studio if you go that route.
I wish everyone lots luck making these decisions. I certainly did a lot of homework making that decision. I suggest the same for others
p.4 #18 · New Apple Studio Machines-Which one for LR/Photoshop with Sony A7RV?
GMPhotography wrote:
Its funny on the Mac mini 4 Pro I kept hearing and or reading the fans would go nuts and I have yet to even hear them and im batch processing thousands of images at once. Just kinda odd. Im sure it is working but no real signs of it with noise. My M3 laptop the fans certainly go nuts but im not using that much for processing but more presentation stuff.
Be careful what you're reading too , people tend to exaggerate these issues.
If did not go to the Mini a few months ago I would go with the Max Studio version but Im certainly doing really well with this unit. It's a tough call choosing . If you do the hard drives correctly you save a lot of money and that may help money wise getting the Studio if you go that route.
I wish everyone lots luck making these decisions. I certainly did a lot of homework making that decision. I suggest the same for others...Show more →
Yeah, there’s a lot of oddball stuff out there.
I’m also using the mini M4 Pro for my Bridge/ACR/Photoshop workflow and I have yet to hear the fan come on. If it is, it must be so quiet that it is inaudible.
Like you, if the mini M4 Pro did not exist, I’d also be a Studio customer since that’s the only remaining non-laptop option. The Studio is a very powerful machine. But the mini is also shockingly powerful, tiny, and a lot less expensive. I’d rather spend my money on two monitors than on extra ports and speed that i won’t notice.
YMMV.
GMPhotography wrote:
Also there are T5 External Enclosures out now . I grabbed one of them of 200 dollars and a Samsung 990 Pro 4TB drive to put in it so total was 500 bucks for a drive that its reads/writes are over 5600 which is flying. Either system you get you can do this for external drives or get a OWC 4 TB externals enclosure for 130 dollars and put in a 4tb drive for like 3900 speeds . I made 3 of them
