Live data from Hacker News

New Mac Studio with M5 Max and M5 Ultra

apple.com

41–50 of 570 posts

Re: New Mac Studio with M5 Max and M5 Ultra

#41
post #3

Bizarre there isn’t a 1TB RAM option hidden away for the excessively frivolous or VC funded.

They seem to be suffering from the supply constraints like everyone else. They phased out the higher capacities on the M3 Ultra Mac Studio a while ago, and if you order a 128GB MBP, say, you're looking at six weeks or more for delivery.

Re: New Mac Studio with M5 Max and M5 Ultra

#42

Due to pricing insanity (not that Apple prices weren’t insane before the ram/ssd shortages) I’m not in the market but I do wonder if my next computer should be a Mac Studio instead of a MBP that lives its life docked. Might be better to just run a Studio and Neo for the very few times I actually need remote capabilities.

How about business where you send in all your old devices and get back a SSD using using their memories

Re: New Mac Studio with M5 Max and M5 Ultra

#43

> M6 supports up to 32GB of unified memory to multitask across demanding apps and run LLMs on device for secure and private agentic tasks. It also provides up to 170GB/s of unified memory bandwidth — a 10 percent increase over M5 and a 2.5x increase over M1. Isn't 170GB/s slow for bandwidth?

It's higher bandwidth than any dual-channel DDR5 desktop machine, but Apple never quote the memory latency, so hard to compare otherwise.

Re: New Mac Studio with M5 Max and M5 Ultra

#44
post #13

I wish they were offering 1TB of Unified Memory for the M5 Ultra. I already have an M5 Max MBP w/ 128GB of RAM for running local models, and while there's a /few/ models that I can run in 512GB that I can't run in 128GB that are interesting, where things really shift is at 1TB of memory which allows you run >1T parameter models w/ 4 bit quants reliably. 512GB is just on the edge of "enough", which is maybe the point…

chaining an option?

Re: New Mac Studio with M5 Max and M5 Ultra

#45

> M6 supports up to 32GB of unified memory to multitask across demanding apps and run LLMs on device for secure and private agentic tasks. It also provides up to 170GB/s of unified memory bandwidth — a 10 percent increase over M5 and a 2.5x increase over M1. Isn't 170GB/s slow for bandwidth?

You would want to get the M5 pro version with 307gb/s if you were interested in running local LLMs.

Re: New Mac Studio with M5 Max and M5 Ultra

#46
post #31
post #12

10 grand for 256GB memory. Likely double that for 512GB, but won't be available or finalized until October. Thunderbolt 5 is highest bandwidth external IO available at 120Gb/s. 1.2TB/s claimed max internal memory bandwidth. Not exactly "future proof" for >1T parameter models but good for targeting specific lower-parameter models, or if you can rely on pipeline parallelism and run a cluster.

3 of those thunderbolt 5 ports, so you can do a fully connected 4 machine cluster topology.

It's unclear to me how bandwidth scales with multiple connections. Many-to-many does not seem ideal. Daisy chaining would be fine for straight pipeline work. There doesn't seem to be an equivalent of a ethernet switch for thunderbolt 5 though.

Re: New Mac Studio with M5 Max and M5 Ultra

#47

Due to pricing insanity (not that Apple prices weren’t insane before the ram/ssd shortages) I’m not in the market but I do wonder if my next computer should be a Mac Studio instead of a MBP that lives its life docked. Might be better to just run a Studio and Neo for the very few times I actually need remote capabilities.

I've been holding out, because I think my next purchase will be a Studio with an Ultra Chip in it. I'm wanting it to be a "forever" server, so I'm holding out while I can.

Buy in 2 years, or buy now and have it last 2 years less than forever.

Re: New Mac Studio with M5 Max and M5 Ultra

#48
post #13

I wish they were offering 1TB of Unified Memory for the M5 Ultra. I already have an M5 Max MBP w/ 128GB of RAM for running local models, and while there's a /few/ models that I can run in 512GB that I can't run in 128GB that are interesting, where things really shift is at 1TB of memory which allows you run >1T parameter models w/ 4 bit quants reliably. 512GB is just on the edge of "enough", which is maybe the point…

1tb would likely be ~$20k - given the current >$10k price tag of 256gb. Would you still be considering it at that price?

More likely double that, even. I think you'd still see many buyers there. You can spend like $16k alone on a RTX 6000 PRO with a mere 96GB of VRAM now..

Re: New Mac Studio with M5 Max and M5 Ultra

#49
post #12

10 grand for 256GB memory. Likely double that for 512GB, but won't be available or finalized until October. Thunderbolt 5 is highest bandwidth external IO available at 120Gb/s. 1.2TB/s claimed max internal memory bandwidth. Not exactly "future proof" for >1T parameter models but good for targeting specific lower-parameter models, or if you can rely on pipeline parallelism and run a cluster.

> 10 grand for 256GB memory. A NVIDIA RTX 6000, 96 GB at 1.7 TB/s, is 13 grand. This 256 GB at 1.2 TB/s Mac is extremely competitive, it will be sold out everywhere.

Except the RTX 6000 will run circles around the Mac studio in just about every way. Memory bandwidth is literally the only spec where Apple is competitive, and while high memory bandwidth is necessary for LLMs to perform well, many people strangely don't understand that memory bandwidth alone is not sufficient.

Re: New Mac Studio with M5 Max and M5 Ultra

#50
post #13

I wish they were offering 1TB of Unified Memory for the M5 Ultra. I already have an M5 Max MBP w/ 128GB of RAM for running local models, and while there's a /few/ models that I can run in 512GB that I can't run in 128GB that are interesting, where things really shift is at 1TB of memory which allows you run >1T parameter models w/ 4 bit quants reliably. 512GB is just on the edge of "enough", which is maybe the point…

1tb would likely be ~$20k - given the current >$10k price tag of 256gb. Would you still be considering it at that price?

I'd consider a 1tb machine at 20k, but I'm not going to pick up a 256gb one at all. 1TB fits a frontier-ish model in memory without massive quantization, which is a very interesting capability for a non-rack piece of compute.
Post reply on HN