When I review theApple Mac Studioat the remnant of 2023 , I get hold it to be one of the more remarkable art object of microcomputer ironware I had ever used . It was almost magic , packing insane performance inside a petite chassis that somehow stay cool and muted no matter how firmly I pushed things . It was n’t a demented - degenerate play machine , but for anyone who wanted to get substantial oeuvre done , there was nothing else like it .
Apple just updated it for 2025 , with an odd mix of the new M4 Max chipset or an M3 Ultra that step back a coevals in fusing together two M3 Max chipsets . Never bear in mind the weirdness of that combo and any marketing confusion it might create . The new Mac Studio is the perfect desktop machine , and it ’s not just “ almost ” magical this time around .
Specs and configurations
The Mac Studio is a captivating background microcomputer from a pricing view . It go at $ 1,999 for a 14 - core CPU , 32 - core GPU M4 Max chipset , 36 GB of RAM , and a 512 GB SSD . That ’s a small expensive , but not to a fault so for such an incredibly fast and well - design background PC . Upgrading to a 16 - core CPU , 40 - nucleus GPU M4 Max and 48 GB of RAM adds $ 300 , with alternative to pass over to 64 GB ( $ 200 ) and 128 GB ( $ 1,000 ) from there . reposition upgrade run from 1 TB ( $ 200 ) to 8 TB ( $ 2,400 ) . The most expensive M4 Max Mac Studio is $ 5,899 .
The M3 Ultra is more expensive . It take off at $ 3,999 for a 28 - core CPU , 60 - core GPU M3 Ultra chipset , 96 GB of RAM , and a 1 TB SSD . Upgrading to a 32 - burden CPU , 80 - nucleus GPU M3 Ultra adds $ 1,500 , and then RAM can be raise to 256 GB ( $ 1,600 ) with the M4 Max and then the M3 Ultra can also manage 512 GB ( $ 4,000 ) . There ’s also the choice to upgrade to 16 GB of storage for $ 2,400 , usable with 512 GB of RAM ( and thus limit to the M3 Ultra example ) . The most expensive Mac Studio costs $ 14,099 .
So , you could get a very premium desktop that ’s still moderately low-cost and that ’s incredibly tight , initiate at $ 1,999 . Or , you could get the fastest desktop personal computer useable today , mayhap outdoors of high - close enterprise workstation , at a Mary Leontyne Price that ranges from $ 3,999 to $ 14,099 . I reviewed two shape , the $ 3,999 M4 Max 16/40 with 128 GB of RAM and a 1 TB SSD , and the $ 8,099 M3 Ultra 32/80 with 256 GB of RAM and a 4 TB SSD .
Design
The Mac Studio ’s design did n’t exchange with the 2025 update , and that ’s perfectly fine with me . It ’s exactly right , at 7.7 inches in breadth and depth and 3.7 inch improbable , although it looks more like a slightly small block of aluminum that ’s float in midair . It ’s actually fair heavy at 6.1 pounding for the M4 Max version and 8.0 pounds with the M3 Ultra ( the M3 Ultra has a heavier copper heatsink while the M4 Max settles for aluminium ) . It ’s a desktop that wo n’t be moved around much , so the exercising weight is n’t as important . The point , though , is that it not only looks like a solid chunk of metal , but it feels like one , too . But weigh that a recent Windows play desktop that we reviewed , the Lenovo LOQ Tower 17IRR9 , is both massive in size by compare and weighs 18.52 pounds . That just underscores how dementedly diminutive the Mac Studio is , particularly given that it ’s so much quicker in all but gambling .
I hinted at the artistic , and really , graceful simmpleness rules here . It ’s just a floating block with no ornament , highlighted by some front ports that are strictly functional and demo that exquisite Apple manufacturing artistry that the company applies to all its products . Yes , the Mac Studio is expensive , and yes , you really do come aside thinking you ’ve pass your money wisely .
I use the Mac Studio with an Apple Magic Keyboard , and I ’ve strain out a salmagundi of mouse wander from the Logitech MX Master 3S to the Apple Magic Mouse and the Magic Trackpad . Really , take your selection , of course of action . Apple ’s Magic Keyboard is my favorite across both this external supplement and the ones build into Apple ’s laptops . This really does n’t belong in a Mac Studio reassessment , but it ’s still worth cite — pair this keyboard with the Mac Studio and you ’re in productivity heaven . As a writer , the Mac Studio might be overkill but that keyboard is thoroughgoing .
Note that the build - in speaker is suited only for system sound . But there ’s a 3.5 mm audio jack that will plug into headphone or an external loudspeaker system organization . It ’s my one intention complaint that the audio tar is in the back , along with the power push button that would be better up front . I reviewed the Mac Studio using an Apple Studio Display , and the mating was excellent . They looked great together as well , and the Studio Display has impressive audio built in , which is abysmally commodious . I also used it with my standard ingathering of dual 27″ 4 special K and one 32″ 4 kB OLED display ( I know , but it kind of just happened ) , and that worked fantastically well , too .
Ultimately , the Mac Studio is a perfectly designed desktop that ’s both incredibly attractive and elegantly minimalist . It epitomizes Apple ’s fastidious design sensibilities in a manner that , in my legal opinion , is the best among every Apple production I ’ve used . you may get Windows miniskirt - PCs that are similarly sized , like theHP Z2 Mini G9 , but in my opinion , they ’re not well-nigh as cohesively plan and they ca n’t daydream of performing as well — or as quiet , as we ’ll see below .
Performance
In term of performance , the 2025 Mac Studio is like two unlike auto . One of them is expensive but within the reach of “ normal ” people , while one of them is madly expensive and in the province of hard-core master . That all comes down to the M3 Ultra versus the M4 Max chipsets that power them — along with the monolithic amounts of RAM and depot available to the M3 Ultra mannequin .
Note that no matter which model you buy , the Mac Studio is very likely to be the still superfast PC you ’ve ever used . No matter how firmly I pushed either chipset , the machine remained silent . At most , there might have been a hardly audible hush . Obviously , Apple design a thermal system that can keep things cool and move a lot of air without making a lot of racket whenever necessary . When I bunk the same demanding tasks on a MacBook Air 16 M4 Max , which is placid for a laptop , it vocalize like a lading train by comparison . That ’s part of the Mac Studio ’s legerdemain .
M4 Max
The M4 Max chipset is the same as you ’ll see in the MacBook Pro , come in two version . The base poser has 14 CPU core and 32 GPU cores , and the high - end model has 16 CPU cores and 40 GPU cores . It features the incredibly truehearted M4 CPU cores that have the fastest single - kernel carrying out you ’ll feel in a chipset today — macOS or Windows — and GPU cores that feature second - generation irradiation trace and the same mesh shading and dynamical Caching feature as the M3 . Each of those cores is actually firm than the ones you ’ll find with the M3 Ultra , which as the name imply is establish on the previous - generation M3 chipset . And , the M4 Neural Engine runs at 38 tera procedure per 2nd ( TOPS ) , compare to the M3 Neural Engine ’s 18 TOPS . That will make it a peck quicker for on - machine AI processing .
Looking at our standard benchmarks , where I review the M4 Max 16/40 , you ’ll see that the Mac Studio is a pregnant upgrade over the previous generation Mac Studio with the M2 Ultra . view the relative difference in cost , at $ 2,899 for the M4 Max 16/40 with 64 GB of RAM and a 1 TB SSD , which compares to the M2 Ultra example that was $ 3,999 for the same configuration . For $ 1,100 less , you get a machine that ’s a draw quicker .
I suspect that for most user , the M4 Max Mac Studio will be the means to go . I ’ll verbalise more about the compare after touching on the M3 Ultra .
M3 Ultra
The M3 Ultra is an odd pick , really . The M2 Ultra was two then - current - generation M2 Max chipsets fused together . Limitations in the UltraFusion technology that tie in them together means that you were n’t buzz off exactly twice the carrying out , but you got a significant upgrade nonetheless . reckon on the benchmark , the M2 Ultra was around 45 % quicker , which made it not only the fastest Mac ( link up with the Mac Pro at the clock time ) but one of the fastest PCs , period of time .
Similarly , the M3 Ultra is two M3 Max chipsets fuse together . Compared to the M3 Max in the MacBook Pro 16 , it ranges from 31 % faster in Geekbench 6 multi - essence up to 81 % faster in the Cinebench R24 multi - core test . course , its exclusive - core performance is similar . The Mac Studio has an advantage in terms of its thermal design , but even so , the M3 Ultra is a very fast chipset .
distinctly , it ’s quicker than every other personal computer we ’ve examine in most of our benchmark . The Falon NW Talon desktop with the Core i9 - 14900KS background chipset and Nvidia GeForce RTX 4090 desktop GPU ca n’t keep up anywhere except the brute force of the RTX 4090 . And that ’s in these celluloid benchmarks , not necessarily in real - domain chore where the M3 Ultra ’s GPU cores might be more competitive .
I ’ll be looking more into AI functioning at another metre , where I will consider how the M3 Ultra ’s Neural Engine performs . It ’s also double the core counting of the M3 Neural Engine at 32 cores , but at even at double the performance that would be 36 TOPS compare to the M4 ’s 16 - core Neural Engine that course at 38 top . While that means the M4 Max actually has a fast Neural Engine with few inwardness , the most belligerent AI processing is likely to use the GPU centre rather . So , the question of AI processing performance requires some more inquiry .
M3 Ultra versus M4 Max
The challenge is comparing the M3 Ultra to the M4 Max . After all , while the M3 Ultra ( as I review it ) has twice the CPU and GPU core — and in fact , the most Apple has ever put into a chipset — the case-by-case substance are n’t as fast . That ’s light in the undivided - core result , and synthetical benchmarks do n’t give the intact story .
In Cinebench R24 , the M3 Ultra is 45 % faster in multi - marrow but 27 % slow in single - core . That wo n’t matter much , because this is n’t a single - substance form of machine . In Geekbench 6 , the M3 Ultra is only 4 % faster in multi - heart and soul , and it ’s 28 % sluggish in single core . In Handbrake , it ’s just 5 % faster .
One very important test is the Pugetbench Premiere Pro bench mark , where Apple Silicon chipsets benefit greatly from a host of processor optimization that race up various processes like encoding . In Windows , the GPU is a lot more crucial . In this real - creation benchmark , the M3 Ultra is 30 % faster than the M4 Max , which is significant given that ’s clip saved for the kind of professional who might be unforced to pass that kind of money . If you’re able to do your work 30 % quicker , that ’s well worth the investment funds . And , the Mac Studio M3 Ultra is 16 % quicker than the Falcon NW Talon Windows background with one of the fastest GPU ’s available .
step up to the GPU , the news report is even more nuanced . In our semisynthetic benchmarks , the M3 Ultra GPU core do n’t seem all that impressive . In the Cinebench R24 GPU test , the M3 Ultra is just 18 % faster . And it ’s just 4 % faster in the Geekbench 6 GPU Metal test .
However , those synthetic benchmark do n’t tell the whole write up . I also ran a Blender test that used the GPU to render a complex drawing . In the single frame mental test , the M3 Ultra stop in 10.50 seconds compare to the M4 Max at 14.87 second . That ’s a 42 % difference . Over 145 frames , the M3 Ultra took 26:08 equate to the M4 Max at 35:51 , a 37 % difference . That ’s a much better test of how a advanced coating will apply all those cores , and those kind of resolution will only get better with optimisation .
When you consider the actual - worldly concern performance in Premiere Pro and Blender , and extrapolate that over alike applications , the M3 Ultra looks a fortune unattackable . A 30 % or slap-up improvement in performance is n’t anything to sneeze at . And that does n’t take into story the power to upgrade to 512 GB of RAM , which will be implausibly authoritative to some people who are doing extremely intensive work — for illustration , editing 8 K video recording and running local Master of Laws — and the 16 TB of on - twist storage . Of course , that configuration costs over $ 14,000 .
Should you get the M3 Ultra or the M4 Max ? Most likely , if you ca n’t reckon spending that much money on the M3 Ultra , then you ’re not its target . The M4 Max will in all likelihood be more than tight enough for you , and it ’s still one of the fastest microcomputer we ’ve screen for many tasks — second only to the Mac Studio M3 Ultra , in fact .
But if your business trust on you completing tasks as quickly as potential , then the M3 Ultra is well worth your thoughtfulness . You wo n’t find a more capable machine .
Gaming
The 2023 Mac Studio with the M2 Ultra was a reasonably spry gaming machine as far as MacOS goes , thanks mainly to have a monolithic number of GPU meat . But , those cores did n’t possess the various graphics enhancements bring by the M3 architecture . computer hardware ray tracing , mesh blending , and active Caching for retentivity optimization kick upstairs Apple Silicon a lot closer to powering viable gambling desktops and laptops . The M4 architecture really heighten that further for gaming , think that the M4 Max actually has somewhat salutary GPU magnetic core than the M3 Ultra . But , of course , that Saratoga chip gives you 60 or 80 CORE , which are insane numbers that serve to surmount the M4 ’s architectural advantage .
We ’ve seen that the M3 Ultra GPU cores do n’t have as much of an upside over the M4 Max GPU cores . The problem is , we do n’t have a draw of gaming bench mark we can run on macOS . I start the 3DMark Steel Nomad Light Unlimited benchmark and the M3 Ultra scored 19,139 compared to the M4 Max at 14,967 . That ’s a 28 % departure , still not a lot but more than we view with either Geekbench 6 or Cinebench R24 GPU tests .
However , I did turn tail two games with built - in benchmarks , specificallyCivilization VIandShadow of the Tomb Raider . Both of those are older titles that do n’t make enjoyment of the enhanced features of either the M3 or M4 GPU core . The M4 Max was faster inCivilization VIat both 1080p and 1440p , and by a considerable security deposit . Both Mac Studio translation were importantly truehearted than the M2 Ultra model . InShadow of the Tomb Raider , the M3 Ultra was faster in all but 1080p , with its 4 K mark being the biggest difference at 26 % . I really ca n’t say how those results will extrapolate to dissimilar titles .
We ’re seeing more modern games come to macOS , includingCivilization VII , AC Shadows , andCyberpunk 2077 . We practice the latter biz for our Windows play benchmarking , and I ’d love to run that on the Mac Studio . I pass Baldur ’s Gate 3 , and it was bland at 4 K on both machine . I could n’t really distinguish a difference between the M3 Ultra and M4 Max versions , but that game does n’t have an in - plot benchmark , so I could n’t quantify them .
Of course , the Mac Studio is n’t really aimed at gamers . At least , nobody ’s going to buy it exclusively to play plot . And , developer will certainly do the dear employment of optimizing the game for those 80 central processing unit substance . So , things will just get undecomposed over sentence .
Connectivity and display support
There ’s an incredibly wide and diverse stage set of ports and connectivity in the Mac Studio . The expectant change from the previous coevals is the replacement to Thunderbolt 5 , which triple the available bandwidth over Thunderbolt 4 from 40Gbps to 120Gbps . That means you ’ll get the fast possible speeds for connecting computer peripheral , including the outside storage that many creators will in all probability want to plug in .
On the front , you get two Thunderbolt 5 ports on the M3 Ultra mannequin and two USB - C embrasure on the M4 Max , along with a full - sized South Dakota card reader . On the back , there are four Thunderbolt 5 ports ( on both example ) , two USB - A larboard , a 10Gbps Ethernet connection , a HDMI 2.1 porthole , and a 3.5 mm sound recording jack . You ’ll also discover the power clitoris on the back , along with the power connection .
In my setup , that means that all of the cables tucked away out of sight , adding to a clean feel . I do like the 3.5 millimeter audio jack , one of the USB - A ports , and the power button were on the front for easier accessibility , but that ’s a quibble given that this is n’t a monolithic tug lay on the floor where all the port are concentrated to turn over . And , wireless connectivity is a generation behind at Wi - Fi 6E and Bluetooth 5.4 . That wo n’t weigh for a few year , though , which is how tenacious it ’s potential to take for Wi - Fi 7 to be a dominant measure .
Display living is a bit complicated . It remains almost the same as the previous model with support for five monitor , and there ’s better execution with the M3 Ultra . The M4 Max can run four displays with 6 K resolution at 60Hz via Thunderbolt 5 and another 4 K display at 144Hz ( up from 60Hz ) via HDMI . Or , you’re able to connect two displays at 6 K and 60Hz and one 8 K at 60Hz or 4 jet at 240Hz via HDMI .
With the M3 Ultra , you may run up to eight displays at 4 K and 144Hz or 6 K at 60Hz . Or , you’re able to link four displays at up to 8 one thousand at 60Hz or 4 K at up to 240Hz . That ’s a pregnant improvement over the M2 Ultra Mac Studio , and it ’s really unequaled external display support .
An amazing little chunk of maximum performance
search , there ’s no getting around it : the Mac Studio can be an deucedly expensive screen background . expend $ 14,099 may voice crazy , but when you consider that the price admit a monolithic 512 GB of RAM and 16 TB of storage , it ’s not really all that unexpected . If you need it , you demand it , and the price wo n’t be as much of an impediment . If you do n’t , you’re able to safely disregard it .
But maybe just as crazy is that the $ 1,999 configuration will be plenty of compute power fora lotof user . The real magic might be in how you could get such a remarkably small and fast screen background for what amount to a reasonable Mary Leontyne Price , while office users can commit in a desktop that ’s certain to meet every imaginable need .
