M5 Ultra Mac Studio Review (macstories.net)
215 points by piotrgrabowski 8 hours ago
simonw 7 hours ago
The numbers I was most interested in are tucked away in a chart towards the bottom - the speed comparison of the Mac Studios v.s. a RTX 5090:
Qwen3.8 27B tokens/sec generation speed
Prompt size 8K 64K 128K 256K
RTX 5090 PC 59 51 44 n/a
M5 Ultra 48 39 32 24
M3 Ultra 31 23.5 20 15
A whole bunch more comparison numbers in this section: https://www.macstories.net/stories/m5-ultra-mac-studio-revie...lhl 33 minutes ago
A basic llama-bench on Qwen 3.8 27B UD-Q4_K_M gives pp512 3920 tok/s / tg128 81 tok/s on a 500W RTX PRO 6000 (should be similar speeds to a 5090, chip is basically the same, just less VRAM). With MTP3 this is 140 tok/s on mtp-bench.
This is with llama.cpp. You can of course use vLLM/SGLang well on these cards and they're even faster. On vLLM w/ NVIDIA/Qwen3.8-27B-NVFP4 baseline has a prefill of about 13,000 tok/s. The baseline tok/s is 72 tok/s, but at mtp7, it's 157 tok/s, and w/ dflash7 that goes up to 215 tok/s. On mtp-bench, DFlash2 gets a hair under 300 tok/s w/ the code_python prompt.
gpugreg 7 hours ago
Those RTX 5090 numbers are bad. You can get over 200 tps with ninfer using NVFP4 and MTP.
beastman82 6 hours ago
can confirm.
I dont' know why people spend huge money on these and Spark. The 5090 is running qwen 3.8 at 200+ tps!! That's 1-2 orders of magnitude faster.
fhub an hour ago
_hugerobots_ 5 hours ago
tomega2134 4 hours ago
nacs 6 hours ago
throwaway27448 5 hours ago
Eisenstein 5 hours ago
cyanydeez 3 hours ago
mathisfun123 6 hours ago
GeekyBear 2 hours ago
The issue is that the moment you want to run the more capable models that will no longer fit in a single 5090's memory, performance falls off a cliff.
liuliu 6 hours ago
Both are probably single-token decode performance, which is reasonable to show. Otherwise agree RTX 5090 should shinebetter with NVFP4.
searealist 4 hours ago
... or with llama.cpp with MTP.
redox99 7 hours ago
A dense 27B doesn't really make sense for the Mac. A MoE makes way more sense when you have modest bandwidth but lots of memory.
tcdent 5 hours ago
A dense model (up to the amount of memory available) actually does make the most sense on unified memory architectures. But when you hit the limit of what you can hold in memory, you reach the limitation of the platform.
Whereas a hybrid architecture with distinct DRAM and VRAM with sparse MoE, you can leverage two different bit rates depending on the actual need for constant access to common layers versus sparse access to infrequent layers and arbitrage the difference in cost for each of those in distinct classes of hardware.
peri-cl 7 hours ago
They do MoE. They benchmarked GLM 5.3-flash (320B / 18B), and Qwen 3.8-flash-next (125B / 6B). The dense Qwen is only focused (I assume) because it's about the only thing that fits on a 5090, that they can compare the two heads on.
skohan an hour ago
1.2 T/s is not that modest is it? That's very close to an RTX pro 5000
peri-cl 7 hours ago
Those are some incredible graphs, that leap in prompt processing going from M3 to M5.
Also: ~30 token/s on GLM 5.3-flash, locally. (That's roughly Opus 4.8-tier. I think).
/meta Here's a CSS filter that stops those nuisance chart animations,
macstories.net##*:style(animation: none !important; transition: none !important)nacs 6 hours ago
That's a dense model. Of course it will do worse.
Now try running that Qwen 3.8 Next model on the 5090 and tell me what TPS you get (hint: it's near 0 since it doesnt fit the 32GB VRAM on 5090 vs the 256 in OPs M5).
peri-cl 6 hours ago
Surprisingly, the Reddit crowd are reporting 50–60 tokens/s (for the 32 GiB 5090 + 128 GiB RAM)—on par with the M5 Ultra benchmarks, despite both the PCIe bottleneck and much smaller DDR5 bandwidth,
https://old.reddit.com/r/LocalLLaMA/comments/1wl06np/qwen38f...
(Note it's a sparse MoE with only 6B active).
bitexploder 2 hours ago
nacs 6 hours ago
karmakaze 4 hours ago
I really appreciate seeing these dense model numbers. For a large unified memory system though I expect that MoE numbers are what people are more interested in.
These numbers could and should get much better. As an example I can run Qwen3.8-27B-MXFP4 (W4A8) on 2x AMD R9700 that gets 260+ tokens/sec to start and slows down to ~110 tokens/sec over 128k context and can do the max 256k. These are for batch size 1 and throughput goes higher with batching. This is due to speculative decoding, efficient all-reduce inter-gpu compression, and custom GEMM kernels for the specific hardware. Note each R9700 only has 644 GB/s memory bandwidth.
alex7o 5 hours ago
On my m5 max 27b model does 75tps on 256k ctx and starts at 80 on the 8k ctx when you add https://huggingface.co/collections/z-lab/dflash-2 to it. So yeah base might be 30tps (I used iq4) but mtp or dflash help a lot and should be used when checking what is useful and what is not for running models as it is not fare to judge without them.
RationPhantoms 7 hours ago
Thank you for this. I wish Apple focused their silicon design on improving the TTFT metrics but coming from an M3 Pro, it still looks laggard compared to Nvidia's TensorCores in the 5090.
Maybe Apple is an acquisition away from changing that balance.
wlesieutre 7 hours ago
The rumor on Apple's processor roadmap is that they're skipping other M6 variations (all previous generations had Pro and Max, a few had Ultra) in order to focus on the M7 generation for AI reasons. What exactly the M7 improvements are who knows.
kridsdale1 6 hours ago
GeekyBear 4 hours ago
aurareturn 4 hours ago
M6 got another prompt processing boost. Likely no M6 Ultra though because Apple is reportedly going all in on AI performance in M7 generation.
api 5 hours ago
I assume those are non-batched. I think the M series GPU can do 4X to 8X depending on model quant, which means if you can batch queries you'll get almost 4X to 8X performance.
jmyeet 7 hours ago
The selling point of the M5 Ultra Mac Studio is that you can run much larger models that the 5090 can't without swapping. NVidia aggressively segments the market on VRAM for this reason. That's why a 5090 has an MSRP of ~$2k (but good luck getting one for less than $4k) while a 6000 Pro, which is basically a 5090 with 96GB of RAM has now soared beyond $15k where 3-6 months ago it was more like $10-11k. A 6000 Pro has the same memory bandwidth but slightly more CUDA units (IIRC ~24k vs ~21k).
This advantage won't be apparent with a 27B model. The 256GB MS can probably run the newer Flash models locally, something you can't do on a 5090.
I don't think we'll get a successor to the 5090 until late 2028, maybe even 2029. I'm basing this on the launch date of the 5000 series and that we haven't got a midcycle refresh yet. Rumor has it the chips are ready but the 3GB RAM modules are 3-4x the price of the 2GB modules used on the current cards.
Apple should see a Mac Studio major update in 2028. That might even force NVidia's hand. But it's really impossible to say what the state of the market will be 2-3 years from now. It may have completely crashed. I suspect not however.
The interesting thing will be when the bandwidth demands start forcing HBM memory onto these home/enthusiast solutions.
pama 6 hours ago
But what about builds that combine 8 of the 5090 with infiniband between boxes? Wouldn't that be comparable to the mac in terms of price and potentially beat it by a lot in terms of performance for the large MoE? I understand the space/heat/noise considerations, but price wise it may still not make as much sense as people think. (Agreed that it is hard to get the NVIDIA hardware and the 6000 pro are priced less competitively).
happyopossum 11 minutes ago
throw0101c 3 hours ago
wmf 6 hours ago
glitchc 2 hours ago
kridsdale1 6 hours ago
prmoustache 6 hours ago
jmyeet 5 hours ago
weee322 3 hours ago
openai make a npu google make npu (tpu no mater) amd buy tellas
every company make his own npu (without xai)
probaby in 2028 we will have more concurent firm on market place
traceroute66 6 hours ago
Not forgetting of course that an RTX5090 is what 600W+ ? And the Mac is probably half that at most ?
washadjeffmad 5 hours ago
Certainly not forgetting wattage. A 5090 is 575W. The M5 Ultra Studio is 480W.
nvidia-smi -pl 450 for like a 4% reduction in throughput. I tend to set it around 350W because it's a comfortable temperature blowing on my legs under the desk without warming my office in the summer.
I put together this system two years ago, so it's a little out of date, but it only cost $3000 for the same performance and capability as an Ultra. I don't think I would spend $7000 to save 100W, though.
TacticalCoder 4 hours ago
beastman82 6 hours ago
sure. so is 2x power worth 10x perf? I think it is in most cases.
ActorNightly 4 hours ago
When you are doing matrix math, compute is compute. Apple cant be more efficient due to physics. The only reason Macs are more efficient in general is that they have tightly bundled hw and sw for specific tasks.
GeekyBear 4 hours ago
The next Ultra, supposedly on deck in 2028:
> Apple's planned M7 Ultra chip is being designed to support up to 1.5 TB of unified memory and to push AI performance toward the class of Nvidia's Blackwell accelerators, according to a new Bloomberg report published by Mark Gurman...
Apple plans to release a base M6 chip this fall for entry-level Macs... a base M7 in the first half of 2027, M7 Pro and M7 Max at the end of 2027, and the M7 Ultra in 2028.
https://www.tomshardware.com/tech-industry/semiconductors/ap...
srcreigh 7 hours ago
This is great as a first look, but the author is not a developer, so we don't yet know whether a dev can be as productive with local models on M5 Mac Studio compared to a 20x subscription plan.
I'm also curious about any new low hanging optimization opportunities in the kernels for this new hardware.
It's already clear to me that M5 Mac Studio is more cost-effective than anything you can run on open router, assuming decent utilization.
The M5 Mac Studio will be the most cost effective way to run uncensored cyber capable open agents.
An exciting tipping point will be if programmers can get an Astra-Ultra like experience all week with this hardware. That would be a real sense where this hardware exceeds the value of even 20x cloud subscriptions.
zozbot234 6 hours ago
Astra-Ultra? Even the largest open model to date (Kimi K3) is nowhere close to Astra level, and it will be quite slow even on the highest-spec M5 Ultra, with achievable speeds of about 0.5 tok/s at most due to having to stream weights from SSD (~13 GB/s on the highest storage capacity M5 Max machines so far). This is OK for doing simple Q&A in the background but it's far from a genuine coding experience. You'd have to test batching of multiple thinking streams in order to try and raise overall tok/s via layer-wise reuse of the streamed weights (and this is where the "Ultra" part sort of becomes relevant; Kimi series models have good support for agent swarms) but this would decrease single-session performance even further. It would only be usable for background jobs, though the hardware would then have a chance of paying for itself if it was fully used on a 24/7 basis.
srcreigh 3 hours ago
> You'd have to test batching of multiple thinking streams in order to try and raise overall tok/s via layer-wise reuse of the streamed weights
isn’t this very straightforward to do..? I thought batching for Qwen models is already proven out.
> but this would decrease single-session performance even further
Well let’s take Qwen 3.8 27B. Throughput for M3 at 8 agents is 4x compared to single agent. [1]
It’s really not clear to me that 8 concurrent agents at half speed will be worse task completion latency than 1 agent.
And that’s M3 studio benchmarks, not even M5 ultra, and without the many software improvements we will see
If you haven’t tried Qwen 3.8 27B xhigh on a task you might not get the hype. Idk.
If you’ve tried doing this and don’t like it sure, and be specific about what isn’t effective, but let’s not speculate.
[1]: https://omlx.ai/benchmarks/performance/69kzkrv8?utm_source=c...
zozbot234 2 hours ago
slowin 6 hours ago
> This is great as a first look, but the author is not a developer, so we don't yet know whether a dev can be as productive with local models on M5 Mac Studio compared to a 20x subscription plan.
Local models are definitely not as productive as SOTA, sadly it's not close yet. I do think someday they will be "good enough" to use, but they aren't today. Even the SOTA models barely code well, with Opus 4.5 being the first, good coding model.
That being said, I think it's absolutely imperative that we keep pushing local model performance. We need to continue to advance technology there and ensure that the model labs don't do regulatory capture in the name of "safety" (or anything else).
nowittyusername 5 hours ago
With the latest codex (weekly quota burn) fiasco I tried open weight alternatives for the first time. And tyeah... open weight models cant compete with likes of astra yet. But, my hope is that by the time I get my Mac studio at end of november an open weight models would have closed the gap (which i think is realistic at the speed of progress). Now its true a better gpt version will also be available then but it also seems the gap is shrinking with time so theres that.
Octoth0rpe 2 hours ago
_hugerobots_ 5 hours ago
Local models can be widely used as productive assets. Yes the infrastructure of SOTA API models is engineered specifically for you to be that utility, but the blanket statement that local isn't up to par is intensely short sighted. Billions of tokens per month on local pays for the hardware when compared to sota costs per month.
slowin 5 hours ago
sethd an hour ago
I find it funny that the thing always mentioned with this machine is local AI. If you're a local model enthusiast, then maybe that makes sense, but I just don't see the economics working there.
I ordered the same one for work so I could run more local agents at once (many iOS simulators and Xcode build processes).
sajithdilshan 7 hours ago
On Apple website it says 512GB memory option is available in October. I guess bumping to that one would cost additional 4-6k US$. So an Ultra with 2TB storage would be north of 15k US$.
That’s like 12 years worth of OpenAI Pro subscriptions
112233 7 hours ago
Hard to guess, it can go either way. If you will need to be in a syndicate to use non-sterilized models, that mac makes sense. But if there is mandatory registration of personal cyberarms, you risk going to mines once they check you purchases. You could try to play normie and pretend you simply wanted to show off, by keeping your actual work on external disk, but that leaves traces on system. Counting on someone in the Gap renting you gray iron works as long as you can swap credits. Still, this gear is tiny. Put it in your e-car, with uplink, and leave it at uncle's farm. Discreet.
woah 4 hours ago
It was a dark rainy night in Neo-Tokyo as Blake puffed on his vapor cartridge and watched the Mac dealers prowl below. Almost 15k Union Credits to get one of them to meet you in an e-cafe with a fully loaded M5, but man, the inference rush from one of those things was something else.
glitchc 2 hours ago
I'm sold on "personal cyberarms" as a concept
Do they include footguns from pointer bugs?
Razengan 6 hours ago
I gotta have some of what you had :)
kridsdale1 6 hours ago
nowittyusername 5 hours ago
512 option isnt worth it imo, you get severe slowdowns when weights are that large. 256 is the sweet spot, you can run large open weight models at decent speeds for full private inference.
Octoth0rpe 2 hours ago
a) we don't actually know what the prices will look like yet, b) what about same weights + huge context? or, same weights that you'd run on 128gb/256gb, but multiple models running for different tasks?
zamadatix 2 hours ago
throw0101c 4 hours ago
> 512 option isnt worth it imo, you get severe slowdowns when weights are that large.
I think most people are getting 512 for running Chrome with a bunch of tabs open. /s
geodel 7 hours ago
Agreed.
Specially since one can pay half right now to OpenAI and sign a 12 year iron clad contract for uninterrupted service delivery of OpenAI Pro.
Kurtz79 7 hours ago
I think we all expect the heavy subsidized subscriptions to end or significantly increase in price at some point, but it could be years from now and I'd rather spend a similar figure on an hypotetical Mac Studio M8 Ultra, or whatever more advanced competitor that will have likley appeared by that time.
A more apples-to-apples comparison would be with API cost in OpenRouter at the same tok/s rate for the same models that you can run locally, maybe.
qwytw 4 hours ago
BatFastard 5 hours ago
vardump 7 hours ago
I hope that was sarcasm.
cyclopeanutopia 7 hours ago
patrickmcnamara 6 hours ago
HN always has these completely contrived counterarguments. What is actually going to realistically happen that will prevent use of an LLM provider? Did you think that the OP literally meant the 12 years or maybe it was just to show how expensive using a Mac Mini as an alternative is?
geodel 6 hours ago
kridsdale1 6 hours ago
ericmay 6 hours ago
Just commenting here because you're discussing hardware: I thought the test results from the SSD published in this article [1] were pretty interesting. Maybe that's old news though.
[1] https://www.macworld.com/article/3238319/mac-studio-m5-max-r...
simonw 7 hours ago
Yeah, anyone who thinks local AI is going to save them money is likely to be disappointed, at least if they want to run models that are even remotely capable.
Plenty of other reasons to get excited about local AI, but I don't think cost is one of them.
criddell 7 hours ago
Maybe you are using a local model to go after some Millennium Prize problem and you don't want OpenAI to take your work and use it to win the prize for themselves? $15k might be a bargain.
And, yes, I know a current local model wasn't going to solve the Navier-Stokes problem, but I'm just using it as an example where privacy might be valuable.
bel8 36 minutes ago
simonw 6 hours ago
matt-p 3 hours ago
On a personal level maybe not yet, but for a medium business upwards it may make sense.
hgoel 6 hours ago
Despite being on a site called Hacker News, we seem to often overlook the simple aspect of wanting local AI hardware to hack (not necessarily in the cybersecurity sense) with. I got my local AI hardware because it's an enjoyable hobby for me.
ionwake 4 hours ago
mstaoru 40 minutes ago
What do people realistically do with these? It's too slow and du... not SOTA-level for coding. It's way too slow for video. I tried simulating an "Fable herding Qwen subagents" and it takes much longer and delivers a much worse result than Fable/Astra alone.
tempoponet 7 hours ago
While I know it's not apples to apples, the target comparison right now is 2x DGX Sparks. Similar price, 256gb. The conversation has focused on memory bandwidth vs. compute in agentic loops, so for most people the raw numbers will mean less than the "time per task" in coding benchmarks.
This is a great article and bodes well for the M5, but we should expect more like this comparing to other platforms before we truly understand where it fits.
_hugerobots_ 5 hours ago
Speed vs task-completion is a new conversation and a great point. Whereas the cost to compute doesn't exist in a vacuum, making mistakes costs less, is easier to maintain with granularity and a whole host of other factors when you own the lab.
ApolloFortyNine 7 hours ago
The model being tested is 18k as configured.
I didn't expect this to make the 5090 to look like a good deal.
nacs 6 hours ago
5090 has 32GB VRAM.
It'd be silly to buy the 18k model to run a tiny model like Qwen 27B. You use models like GLM Flash and Qwen Next which won't fit on a single 5090.
asimovDev 4 hours ago
can run multiple subagents of Qwen 27B though, right? Unless I am fundamentally misunderstanding how VRAM constraints work
Eisenstein 4 hours ago
orsorna 5 hours ago
Is it that silly? You could run multiple 27B models in parallel.
peri-cl 5 hours ago
hamiltont 4 hours ago
Once you hit the memory you need, generation speed is mainly set by bandwidth, and every Ultra from M1 thru M3 has ~800 GB/s. IMO best ROI for most people is 'cheapest used Ultra with enough RAM'
I setup an eBay alert and picked up a used M2 Ultra that has delivered good ROI (at least, far better than 15k for comparable-for-my-use-case performance)
peri-cl 4 hours ago
I think M1 through M3 were compute bottlenecked in prompt processing (hence the very large gap between M3 and M5, in this page's benchmarks, that's not explained by memory bandwidth alone).
For generation speed in isolation, yes.
GeekyBear 4 hours ago
The M5 generation added tensor instructions to the GPU cores.
Lwerewolf 4 hours ago
This one is 2x m5 max, so ~1.2TB/sec.
akozak 6 hours ago
"a total cost of $0" Uhh ... how much is that hardware?
saagarjha 43 minutes ago
I think the power itself will probably be more than you're paying in a subscription
happyopossum 6 minutes ago
<500W draw at peak, so maybe not?
novaleaf 5 hours ago
Another comment approximates at around USD$15k, so yeah, not zero.
dylan604 20 minutes ago
For HN readers earning that sweet sweet VC money, that is zero!
liuliu 6 hours ago
When people benchmark MLX related quant models, they really need to publish numbers on benchmarks. You cannot take this as it is what you get of the original models. MLX uses pretty simple quantization methods so at lower bits without QAT, it is just not as good quality as llama.cpp ones.
mtsolitary 2 hours ago
Waiting for my 64GB M5 Pro Mini, hoping it will also be fun to tinker with for local AI
SamuelAdams 6 hours ago
I think Apple is really sleeping on making this run a Linux server. These things are very capable and draw very little wattage when idle. It would make an excellent homelab device, but MacOS currently holds it back in this regard.
flounder3 5 hours ago
jjtheblunt 3 hours ago
i use linux a ton too, but still wonder what you want in a Linux server that macos as a BSD server does not have.
Gracana 2 hours ago
I'll probably manage with Mac OS well enough, but my linux distro comes out of the box with all the latest OSS tooling I'm familiar with, plus a package manager, and it has linux cgroups and namespaces that power the container technologies we all know and love.
If I switch to Mac OS, I have to sort out a package manager and install all the stuff that's missing, and when it comes to containers... they're just linux VMs. I'd happily cut out the weird proprietary middleman if I could.
crossroadsguy 6 hours ago
My mac is 5 years old. I don't think I can comfortably buy a new one right now. It has a 16GB unified RAM. Honestly that would be enough for so many local models that I want to use but can't use. Because RAM usage (even with literally every single user installed app quit/stopped) the RAM usage is very high that I can barely safely get 6-7 GB (I am supposed to get ~10 GB, but it goes up and down real fast!). That's a shame. If only I could install an alternative OS that uses very little amount of RAM :-)
mjlee 3 hours ago
How are you measuring memory usage? top tells me that 45/48GB is "used", but Activity Monitor shows me that 24GB is cached files.
I'd be quite surprised if Mac OS alone needs more than 8GB, given that they sell the Neo with 8GB of RAM today.
odkdkekfkwjf 33 minutes ago
Free RAM is wasted RAM.
kokonokko1337 7 hours ago
> "It also happens to be a Mac, with an operating system that looks nice and doesn’t suck"
Yes Apple has some of the best hardware out there, albeit overpriced. But the software is such a hindrance and I can't take anyone that states otherwise seriously. If only it had proper Linux support (and the Asahi people do an amazing job but you can reverse-engineer only so many stuff with limited funding, and then you have to do it again for new models). MacOS is good if you just want to have a standard experience, which to be fair is most people. It's good for just setting up an LLM server I guess since the hardware is a perfect fit. I wouldn't touch it otherwise.
steve1977 5 hours ago
What exactly is missing from macOS that makes you feel the need for Linux?
I get it on Windows systems, at least when someone wants to use Linux-type tooling. But macOS already supports pretty much all of that natively?
dylan604 14 minutes ago
Comparing to Linux is too general. You need to say what distro and what install level. I really only use headless Linux, but I've never logged into a fresh install and not had to do some sort of 'apt install devel-packages' equivalent for which ever distro being used. That's the same thing with macOS after choosing which package manager to use. I don't see how Linux vs macOS is very different
RunSet 5 hours ago
> What exactly is missing from macOS that makes you feel the need for Linux?
For starters, the source code.
odkdkekfkwjf 32 minutes ago
steve1977 4 hours ago
theplumber 6 hours ago
At this point I think I will get the DGX gb300 workstation though I will wait a bit more for the cold season. It is double the price but at least is the real thing
lowbloodsugar 2 hours ago
Double?? They are nearly $100k.
addaon 6 hours ago
Ordered one for OpenFOAM. Excited for it. Will be nice to not have my laptop running CFD 24 hours a day, but my M1 Max is currently my fastest machine… I’m expecting about 3.5x from the M5 Ultra.
snarfy 7 hours ago
$12,299
andrekandre 6 hours ago
5 years of (200/month) tokens at that price, meanwhile an rtx 5090 pc is about half that… hmm
but i wonder how much these token costs are sustainable or not, it may be in the long term cheaper to have your own hardware if token costs go up (and hopefully hardware gets cheaper again)
drdaeman 2 hours ago
Those tokens aren’t guaranteed (esp. with RE and security tasks - rooted my own TV last week, Claude crapped out on “cyber safety” grounds; but also no guarantees about the model served - providers can pull a switcheroo on weights or quantization at any moment, and new options may not work for you), and you’re throwing money at entities that aren’t aligned with your interests instead of entities who are interested in actually empowering you.
bel8 26 minutes ago
chasd00 6 hours ago
The token price isn't the only reason to run a model locally though. You can do additional training to specialize or remove censorship that may be a no-no per TOS with cloud GPUs.
drdaeman 2 hours ago
Eisenstein 4 hours ago
$2200 for a 64GB VRAM machine if you are willing to do a bit of work.
crorella 5 hours ago
What are good options to run local models nowadays? Something good for coding and personal assistant kind of things
BatchJob 7 hours ago
If you are buying expensive hardware to run LLMs "on your own machine" you will soon find your ladder is on the wrong wall.
devy 7 hours ago
This dream machine costs over $15k (not including the Apple Studio Display)? Nah, that dream is SO OUT OF TOUCH!
aenis 4 hours ago
The irony here is, thats hobby hardware. You spend 20k and can run slow hobby models that are barely capable of anything unsupervised.
Entry level serious hardware starts at 100k, and a bit better but still almost-useful grade is 200k (8x rtx pro, plus a nice epyc pairing). Thats the sort of thing a salaried expert lets their employer buy them for sort of serious work.
Anything really serious is well north of 1M - not including the housing and commercial grade mains connection. And at best that buys fast Kimi K3 or GLM.
12kaj2 6 hours ago
The Year Of Local AI will be here no later than 2040, coinciding with the Year Of The Linux Desktop.
prmoustache 5 hours ago
The year of linux on the Desktop was 26 years ago for me.
saejox 5 hours ago
i can buy a house with that amount of money. it used to be car money.
villgax 5 hours ago
Lol, try generation of images & videos on these, they ought to improve perf on Deep learning not just llms
slashtom 5 hours ago
Fantastic review, this is how it should be done with local AI.
sghiassy 7 hours ago
Imagine spending a trillion dollars on data centers and then reading this article. Nightmare fuel for OpenAI
whalesalad 7 hours ago
For 99.99% of people, spending 15 grand on a Mac Studio just to run Qwen 3.8 locally is a non starter.
jmull 6 hours ago
It's not the M5 Ultra itself, but the M7s or M9s that will do the damage.
99% of people will use whatever AI is free. The sophisticated, heavy users that are willing and able to pay a lot of money the ones that will be interested in controlling their inference bills.
Today, the sweet spot where an M5 Ultra makes sense is tiny. But we might expect that to grow a lot.
BatFastard 5 hours ago
sghiassy 6 hours ago
Yes, but in 7 years?
whalesalad 5 hours ago
beastman82 6 hours ago
at 15 tok/s
CamperBob2 4 hours ago
And nightmare fuel is just what they'll be selling at the UN this week, for this very reason.
Sam's address will probably be more riveting, imaginative, and terrifying than the last couple of Terminator screenplays. Legislators will lobby him to write the laws for them, and the ghost of Harlan Ellison will threaten to sue him.
ajross 4 hours ago
I don't see how that math works? This is a $15k rig under benchmark and per the results it competes very acceptably against... one consumer GPU.
I really don't see who buys this, except people who want the Studio for some other reason. But nothing in the story says you want to fill racks with these instead of Blackwell or TPU parts; it's not even close.
sghiassy 2 hours ago
Your math is correct, but it’s math based on today’s economics.
Think of a company like Apple moving onto your turf. They’re not going to cede AI to the cloud. They want their part of the pie.
So in 7 years, how much AI will be handled locally on your iPhone. And will you have repaid all the debt on your balance sheet before Apple eats your lunch
SXX 2 hours ago
ajross an hour ago
lowbloodsugar 2 hours ago
Everyone looking at the Qwen3 27B model and the 5090. It’s like saying a Porsche is better than a $5m Komatsu earth mover at moving a 20lb carry-on suitcase. Yes. Yes it is. Why do people spend $5m on a komatsu then, when this one metric shows the Porsche is better? Huh. Show us the “Moving 300 metric tonnes in one load” metric. How’s the Porsche now? Oh, the Porsche is in the Komatsu? Ok I’m getting a bit carried away with that analogy.
cptskippy 5 hours ago
I think we'll eventually get to the point where folks will have a local AI agent but I think people need to temper their expectations to a degree. You aren't going to have data center level tok/s from a box sitting under your desk and you don't need instantaneous responses for many workloads. Having a local agent that can execute tasks over a couple days with your supervision that might otherwise take you weeks is perfectly acceptable.
However I also think that Agentic AI is very much not an out-of-the-box solution, local or otherwise, and it takes a high level of technical knowledge to create an effective AI agent. And there's a problem now where most orchestration is fixed on what models are used for what tasks with no ability to weight constraints like cost, speed, and security.
WarmWash 7 hours ago
>Let’s address the elephant in the room first: why bother with local AI at all when cloud frontier models are better and often faster?
Ehh, the actual elephant in the room is:
"why bother with local AI at all when you can lease a GPU for $5/hr?"
To which the answer is you shouldn't bother, unless you have a bunch of money to throw at hobby projects.
Youden 4 hours ago
$5/hr = $3600/mo.
Unless you only need the AI available some of the time, $5/hr is pretty expensive. That's an RTX Pro twice a year.
If you're using it for discrete sessions of coding or something, that might make sense for you but if you're using it for an always-on assistant, that pricing kinda sucks.
WarmWash 3 hours ago
I would imagine extremely few people are utilizing an H200 for every hour of a month. Especially for something like an assistant
5090's are like $0.20/hr
chasd00 6 hours ago
> unless you have a bunch of money to throw at hobby projects.
there are lots of people with very expensive hobbies, see sailboat racing for example.