What Engadget has done is to try to make its own tests as realistic as possible. Again, recognize what your workflow demands, and then pick accordingly. If you do need to do heavier photo work, however, the higher RAM limits of the Ultra can come in handy. If you’re a photo editor, the almost identical single-core performance of both models will mean you’re better off with the cheaper version in terms of value. If you’re heavy into ProRes and video codecs such as H.265, having double the accelerators found in the Ultra will give you great performance gains. Macworld ran a very thorough set of benchmarks, which suggested that the benefit of the top-end chip varied a lot, with ProRes videographers seeing the greatest improvement. This means that M1 Ultra is about 20% faster than the most expensive CPU available for the Intel Mac Pro. The 28-core Intel Xeon W-3275M processor, which is the best you can get with Mac Pro, scores 19951 in Multi Core. We got an early sense of just how powerful the M1 Ultra chip is when a Geekbench test showed it to be more powerful than the highest-spec CPU offered in the Intel Mac Pro. This is effectively two M1 Max chips in one. With the launch of the Mac Studio, Apple also announced a brand-new Apple Silicon chip, the M1 Ultra. These ranged from comparisons to the 28-core Intel Mac Pro to a comprehensive set of tests by Macworld.Ī new set of tests not only aims to see how the M1 Ultra and M1 Max compare in real-life usage, but also when performing tasks specifically suggested by pro app users … Background We didn’t have long to wait after the launch of the Mac Studio to see a bunch of M1 Ultra benchmarks.

Apple m1 keyshot