6 ms·
This is actually really cheap. Maxed out at £7999 is less than half the price of an HP Z with similar numbers configured in which it probably can’t even get nea
by hughrr 5y ago
This is actually really cheap. Maxed out at £7999 is less than half the price of an HP Z with similar numbers configured in which it probably can’t even get near the mac.
And it doesn’t need $1000 wheels.
- rovr138 5y ago$5,799 for: * 20 core cpu * 64 core gpu * 32 core neural engine * 128GB of ram * 1TB SSD fully maxed out, 8TB SSD
- hughrr 5y agoYeah stuff SSD array in TB4 hole for less money.
- rovr138 5y agoYeah. Obviously depends on people's workload. For myself and to future proof, I can see a benefit for 2TB locally. The rest I can offload to network storage.
- hughrr 5y agoIndeed. I’m running on a 512Gb MBP 14” and have 310Gb free so no point in this for me.
- londons_explore 5y agoStart editing high res video, and those TB's will quickly fill up.
- hughrr 5y agoI have been purposely avoiding that situation to save money :)
- scottlamb 5y agoThat's why hard disks are still made and sold: they're an inexpensive way to achieve high capacity. I wouldn't expect seek latency to be problematic for video editing, and if it is, using the SSD as cache would likely be sufficient.
- gumby 5y agoA TB4 connection is, for all intents and purposes, "local". Way faster than any network storage.
- jeffbee 5y ago$8100 for a 20-core, 128GB, 8TB, 2x10ge, 2xTB3 BTO config of a HP Z6 G4. You get more expandability but fewer and slower TB ports, random graphics, and a much slower CPU, also a different operating system. Z workstations won't be competitive for people who can choose macOS until they refresh them with a newer Xeon. On the other hand, Mac won't be competitive for people who require ECC or Windows or Linux. https://zworkstations.com/configurations/2944242/ https://zworkstations.com/configurations/2944242/
- hughrr 5y agoStick two bigger GPUs in it to drive multiple 4k screens. But yes no ECC. Linux arm64 works on my M1 Pro in UTM using native virtualisation. And it’s fast as anything.
- tonguez 5y ago
- criddell 5y agoIt's cheap for what it is. If you need a machine like this, then what else could you buy? The Studio starts at $2k. If you are going to use it for the next 4 years, that's less than $1.50 / day. No trust fund required.
- schleck8 5y ago32 GB of unspecified frequency ram? 512 GB of unspecified speed and type ssd? That's not a 2000 dollar configuration. For reference, that memory capacity costs 120 euros with 3200 Mhz
- geraneum 5y agoThat 32 GB is not a typical stick. It’s a unified memory on SoC like how it is in smartphones. It affects performance significantly. You can read more about how they work and how they are different here: https://www.howtogeek.com/701804/how-unified-memory-speeds-up-apples-m1-arm-macs/ https://www.howtogeek.com/701804/how-unified-memory-speeds-u... Also it was mentioned, if I’m not mistaken, that the SSD has 7.5 Gb/s read, which is actually pretty good.
- timpattinson 5y ago"unspecified frequency" is LPDDR5-6400. Better than anything else you can get for a reasonable price, and well into the experimental range with a 12th gen Intel cpu
- neop1x 5y ago>> 32 GB of unspecified frequency ram? 512 GB of unspecified speed and type ssd Yes and it is all fun and games as long as it works. If something breaks, it is either terribly expensive to repair or unrepairable completely. Then it may not be as cheap long-term as it may look now... but the situation is probably worse with macbooks and their custom LCDs and keyboards than with this Studio. Is it even possible to boot from USB on these M1 macs after the internal SSD fails?
- forgotmyoldacc 5y agoMy workstation build with Epyc is ~$5,000 and has more cores (24 core), more memory (256 GB), faster GPU (3090), a 2TB pcie 4 SSD and I suspect will perform better on standard benchmarks. Definitely not as compact as the Studio though but lot more extendable.
- ChrisMarshallNY 5y ago> I suspect will perform better on standard benchmarks. I wouldn't be so sure about that. These M1 chips have some crazy benchmark performance. What they don't have, is a standard x86 ISA, which means that a lot of applications run emulated (and still tend to beat many Intel specs, anyway). I keep reading people complaining that "It's faster, but not that much faster. What's the big deal?", when they are talking about an i86 application, running on Rosetta2.
- forgotmyoldacc 5y agoGeekbench scores came out, The Epyc 7443p scored 27461, M1 Ultra scored 24055 on multi-core. Geekbench uses ARM-native for Mac M1 iirc.
- runeks 5y agoSo given the Epyc has 24 cores versus 16 cores for the M1 Ultra, the Epyc has roughly 75% of the single core performance of an M1 Ultra and 115% the multi-core performance.
- ChrisMarshallNY 5y agoYeah, the Threadripper beats the M1Ultra, by just a bit, and has the advantage of being an i86 ISA.
- chaostheory 5y agoI feel that the M chips are awesome at saving power while providing performance which makes them perfect for laptops and portables. I’m not seeing their value proposition for desktops though. I don’t care about something that saves space. The only time I care about that is for portables.