See this is actually what I noticed on my 3090 5950x rig. It renders so smoothly, but UI performance was a joke. I tested the same compositions on a 24" iMac, and while it rendered slow, the UI performance was butter smooth. I will gladly take a slower render over a half second delay on every click.
Thanks for this. My MS won’t come until July, so hearing what’s been optimized and is taking advantage of the MS hardware is very important yo me. I hope you make more of these types of videos. Thanks. Subbed.
Hey!!! Adobe finally release M1 native version of AE (22.3)!! Would be good to see if there is any improvement in performance, now that AE is Native to Apple Silicon
Hi, thanks for the video! Could you please do a test with the demo project Adobe put out last year for multi frame rendering? A lot of people have this project, and it will be cool to see the Mac studio results on it. Thanks
lol, what a comparison... 4 year old Threadripper slower in singlecore apps like after effects than brand new mac studio... its like comparing a roadbike to a downhill bike. both have their specific niche. Don't get a Threadripper, if you dont need massive multicore performance or PCIe lanes. Get something more versatile like a 5950X...
Agreed, that Threadripper or anything with so many cores will perform worse than mainstream CPUs as it will run on slower clock speeds and Adobe is so lazy not to optimise that software UI performance.
Not sure why After Effects its so slow..i mean if mac studio canot run it ....what system will be able to run it smoothly....we are in 2022 adobe should find a way to make it use cpu and gpu and ram power all together ..
It's great to see someone taking about the actual in-use experience of using the software rather than focusing on render times. I have a very similarly specced PC but am now considering an M1-based system. This video series is exactly what I was looking for. Thanks!
If this is the "cheapest" mac studio it would be interesting to see how a $6K mac studio would perform.- which would be the 64Core M1 Ultra and the 128GB of RAM.
Great review! Having the hardest time deciding between the fully maxed out MacBook Pro (max chip) vs the fully maxed out Max Studio (ultra chip). I love the idea of portability of the laptop and could see myself using it potentially in the future especially with a baby on the way, but unsure how much better the fully maxed out studio would be and the ultra chip and if it’s that much better, maybe that would be worth it. Thoughts on that question from people who use Premiere and After Effects on a regular basis?
If you have the option to check the same data with the Vegas Pro software, it will be very interesting to see that this software works best with the PC computer system - I would really love for you to check ..
I think we need more test that show the performance under bottle neck ram. The problem is, the 128gb ram Mac studio is really pricey. And 64 gb isn’t much once we work with complex assets.
I know this video is a year old at this point, but I just want to say thanks for doing this kind of demo. Too many comparison videos are just render times, which doesn't really tell me all that much. I have a beefy PC and I'm somewhat shocked with how poor After Effects performs on it. Leaning towards getting a new m2 studio.
I’ve been looking for this! So many channels I’ve been to before this one only do “bench scores”. That doesn’t help, we want to see actual demonstrations of heavy editing to get the idea. So simple lol. Thank you for this.
but all the plugins are not working in after effect M1 for now.. so the pro users have actually little choice.. working without extra plugins with the mac or all like usual under a pc, that´s a HUGE difference if you really work with it.
I wonder what it would be with a complex project with 50 layers in 4k with depth pass and so on... I think the outcome could be completely different and since I use AE always with Blender, an Nvidia GPU is a MUST. At Blender render Times the MAC Thing is still a joke. Also it is just a tool and I highly respect people doing great work on MACs, too.
Nice to see someone actually push After Effects in a review. Glad to see the 32GB version being tested too, as that's the version a lot of us would be able to afford.
אם יש לך אפשרות בדוק את אותם הנתונים עם התוכנה וגאס פרו, זה יהיה מאוד מעניין לראות את זה כי התוכנה הזאת עובדת הכי טוב עם מערכת המחשב של ה- PC - ממש אשמח שתבדוק..
Is it a good time to buy a new M1 for After Effects? I'm using MBP 15" 2019 i9 with 16 gb of ram and wonder if this M1 would be a substantial upgrade for After Effects/Photoshop ?
I would really like to know, how does the M1 Max (32/64GB RAM) or M2 Max handle timeline loading with 6K PRORES 4444 files. almost everyone is testing render speeds, but there is very limited amount of reviews showing real world performance :-( and when I tested the 30s long 6K PRORES 4444 video, M1 Max with 32 GB did not deliver well- timeline loading was terrible even with quarter resolution. so unusable :-/
If your shooting footage on a $15k+ camera you should probably get the top M1 Ultra Mac Studio. Also I did a video on real world video editing performance on the Mac Studio. Check it out.
I am on an M1 ultra and I’m currently having the worst experience with after effects, I ever have. I’m on AE 2023. The timeline is not smooth, and it just took over 17 minutes to render 1600 frames of 6k ProRes 422. My 2020 i7 iMac was about this fast with 8k ProRes 4444. I know this machine can and should run much faster than this, but I’m not experiencing a very optimized experience from Adobe in March of 2023.
The title of your video says “amazing“ optimization and then in your video you say it’s just a little bit better. Is this Clickbait? And yes, resolve is better than premiere pro by 100 times.
@@ElevatedSystems I guess I did. But the performance will get better as the software updates as well as the operating system. I just ordered the 40 core ultra with 128 gigs of RAM. Just better be better than my 2017 iMac Pro. Lol.
What it can be if the first using of AE from M1 was fast and now it looks like much slower than it was first? How can I test my CPU if it's ok or maybe something wrong with it?
Shoot I’d rather have 10 minutes of extra render time but buttery smooth editing speed and playback. The work environment needs to be smooth. I’ve noticed for me windows pcs don’t hold up as well when in the edit.
Okay, it’s time for a “Back to the Future” moment. In 2009, I purchased a dual-quad-core Intel Xeon Mac Pro. At the time, it was the fastest Mac made. Aaaaand nothing really worked faster on it. Why? This because Intel had released the Core2 Duo chips and everyone and their dog wrote software for that. So, My Mac Pro may have been “future-proofed,” but it was not significantly faster than anything else out there. Also, remember, everything was 32-bit, even though the computer was a 64-bit-capable system. It took Adobe a long time to move applications to 64-bit. And you are working with the base model Apple Studio (and not the Mac Studio M1 Ultra with 128GB of RAM). I think that the Ultra-today-is a “bridge too far,” just as the dual-quad-core Intel Xeon was back in 2009. I think it has “too many” GPU cores and probably “too many” CPU cores. And, you do not want your software spinning off so many threads that it will slow down for the average user who did not buy the new extreme hotness. Which is why it took a little while for software to catch up to the capabilities of the Mac Pro 4,1 and 5,1. I would love to see this beta test software from Adobe running on 128 GB of RAM. But that is only available with the Ultra chip. As you clearly state, AfterEffects will gladly gobble up all available RAM. And that reminds me of the 2009 Mac Pro: You could have twice as much RAM installed in that beastie for those RAM-hungry applications, even though they were not using more than two CPU cores.
I am heavy after effects user. Currently using i9 12900k desktop with 64gb 3080 ti. But i need portable machine with equalnt power. Which laptop would you recommend me?
Be careful with the term 'optimised' the Macs run quicker but there's still a way to go before the systems are running at full utilisation/power-draw. UMA allows flip-flopping to between different silicon and when the App is re-architected to do this, insane things happen (see the combined scores on Affinity Photo benchmark vs discrete PC hardware architecture).
My workstation is many things in one; PC, media server, NAS, hypervisor, render node. The Mac can only possibly replace the PC functions. My workstation will need to live on as my home server to continue to fill its other roles.
Love the conclusion - "if you're a casual user, get the base Mac Studio. If you're a more hardcore user (me expecting him to say get a kick ass PC...), get the Mac Studio Ultra."😆 WTH is wrong with Adobe?
I didn't say get the Ultra. My understanding is not much is yet optimized to take advantage of the extra cores of the Ultra SOC and therefore performance isn't much better than the M1 Max.
Great video! Thank you! Its getting a little clearer. It would be awesome if you could do a more in depth timeline performance comparison between the two machines. My workstation is similar to yours (3950X, 2070 Super, 128GB RAM) and I am pondering whether to change over på Mac OS.
@@rohithmekala2608 Yeah they are, I'm just a pc guy, but I still do like watching videos on this kind of stuff because it's interesting, and really I'd love to have a mac, it's just it would be a pain to get used to all the differences between it and windows.
8:25 not for the price? Really? A 12th gen with 3080 ti costs significantly less than the base level Mac Studio, and with more memory... what are you even talking about?!
