Mac Studio M2 Ultra or M3+ Macbook Pro for Logic? (continued...)

Question

Level 1

4 points

Mac Studio M2 Ultra or M3+ Macbook Pro for Logic? (continued...)

I know this has been posted before but I was unable to reply: Mac Studio M2 Ultra or Macbook Pro 16" M3… - Apple Community

I just splurged on a Mac Studio Ultra because I don't care about portability and have a separate display already, but I'm starting to get cold feet. According to this video, The Macbook Pro can actually hold slightly more tracks than the Mac Studio Ultra. There's also this site that puts them neck-and-neck, with the Studio holding a slight edge.

I know I can't "go wrong" with either, and the largest project I've ever created held maybe 180 tracks, so I'm well under the limits here (omitting extremely CPU/RAM-intensive plugins). But I wanted to post here so that we could dig in the weeds more because track counts are fine and good but that is just one dimension.

If I understand correctly, single-core performance matters significantly for Logic because the entire load of a selected track— including every plugin in its signal chain— is handled by one core, right? Does that mean that the 24 cores (16 performance cores) of the Mac Studio won't have a meaningful improvement over the Macbook's 16 cores (12 performance cores), and that it's possibly worse given the M3's single-core improvements over M2?

Other random ideas. Which of these would be superior for:

Tracking with a < 64 sample buffer size with no hiccups on a sizeable project (this is a nit since I often have to resort to Low Latency mode anyways)?
Loading virtual instruments with tons of samples instantaneously? (is the bottleneck here the storage?)
Loading large (100+ tracks) projects and/or project alternatives quickly (say, < 10 seconds)?
Bouncing a large 5-minute project quickly (say, < 1 minute)?

Lastly, I know with Apple it's impossible to guess what comes next, but with the rumors of M4 Macbooks coming just later this year, I'm worried might feel extremely foolish just a few months from now with a Studio purchase lol. So part of me wants to consider holding tight even longer or grabbing a cheaper older M-chip model that will still take me 90% there and upgrade more frequently. If there are other machines that folks think I should strongly consider, please let me know.

Thanks in advance everyone!

Posted on Jun 18, 2024 1:23 AM

Reply

Answer 1

Jun 18, 2024 6:40 AM in response to j3tman

Everything you wrote above is pointless micro-analysis of something that is already decided. Computers will always be faster, better and cheaper if you WAIT.

...but at some point, you have to get your work done.

So you "hold your nose and vote" -- pick what appears to be a good choice from those available at the moment you are choosing, and go with it. DON'T LOOK BACK. You made a good choice!

Stop trying to decide AGAIN. The one you bought is a really good system for a lot of reasons and it's the one you own now, so unless it is becoming completely unusable, Don't think about this ANY More.

A different/newer computer will have slightly differences from some others you could have bought, or might be available in future, but you made your decision for good reasons. Continuing to dwell on this choice AFTER you have already decided and are working on a good computer already is just a way of dissipating of your good creative energy.

You done good. Now throw yourself into your music-making and don't look back!

Reply

Answer 2

j3tman Author

Level 1

4 points

Jun 18, 2024 9:57 AM in response to Grant Bennet-Alder

That’s totally valid RE: waiting for the next shiny generation of computers. However, what about the primary question of Mac Studio M2 Ultra vs MacBook Pro? Both options are available today, and it’s not entirely clear which performs best using Logic.

Reply

Answer 3

Jun 18, 2024 11:17 AM in response to j3tman

They are comparable.

If you do not demand portability, the Big Money you spend on extreme light weight, a slick built-in display, and potential battery operation are WASTED. Your money buys much more computer in a desktop Mac.

You made a GREAT decision. The system you own will readily and responsively make great music for you, as long as you don't load it up with scare-ware and crap.

By far the easiest way to cause poor performance, instability, overheating and crashing is to install ANY third-party speeder-uppers, Cleaners, Optimizers, or Virus scanners, Bit Torrent, or a VPN that you installed yourself. The main reason is that they are relentless in scanning your files, non-stop, looking for virus-like patterns in Everything, or looking for files that have changed. When completed, they do it all again.

Reply

Answer 4

j3tman Author

Level 1

4 points

Jun 19, 2024 3:07 AM in response to Grant Bennet-Alder

Grant Bennet-Alder wrote:

They are comparable.

If you do not demand portability, the Big Money you spend on extreme light weight, a slick built-in display, and potential battery operation are WASTED. Your money buys much more computer in a desktop Mac.

Yeah, this was my original thinking when I opted for the desktop. I'm still hung up on the single vs. multi-core performance question though. I can get a ton more cores with the studio for a similar price, but my understanding is that single-core performance is still very significant in Logic based on how it handles playback. Ugh, I was going to find a link but it appears it's been removed from the online docs— but I'm pretty sure only one core can handle a channel strip at a time.

[Edited by Moderator]

Reply