The configuration menu is the interesting document here, not the spec sheet. Apple is again offering 512GB of unified memory on the top Mac Studio [1], after spending the past year reducing the M3 Ultra machine's memory choices to 96GB and nothing else [6]. That restored ceiling is 5.3 times what was actually orderable a day ago [1]. On the M5 Max tier, the 128GB maximum is a third more than the 96GB the M4 Max version had been trimmed to [5]. No silicon decision produced those two numbers. Supply did.
The chip underneath is two M5 Max dies bonded by a 4.4TB/s UltraFusion layer, which Apple describes as its first quad-die design [3]. Externally that shows up as up to 1.2TB/s of memory bandwidth [4], roughly double the M5 Max's 614GB/s [3], and as up to 80 GPU cores carrying Neural Accelerators for the first time on an Ultra part [2]. Apple's headline figure for the tier is LLM prompt processing in LM Studio, up to 4x an M3 Ultra [5]; Engadget records a claim of up to 4.5x faster AI compute against the same predecessor [15]. Every one of those numbers is Apple's own and untested.
The pricing tells you where the shortage was absorbed. The Ultra starts at $5,499 with 1TB of storage, $200 above the M3 Ultra configuration [10], which is 2.2 times the M5 Max entry price for approximately twice the silicon [4]. The M5 Max Studio holds at $2,499 [9]. The Mac mini, meanwhile, goes to $899, a $100 rise that Engadget counts as $300 against older minis [11][12]. So the RAM crisis reaches the cheap machine as a price and the expensive machine as a shorter list of things you are permitted to buy.
Engadget places the M5 Ultra Studio with the likes of Pixar rather than typical creatives [16]. That reading sits awkwardly next to the same publisher's account of why Mac minis kept selling out: buyers running local models, sometimes in clusters, to the point that Apple discontinued the cheapest mini in May 2026 [13]. Clustering adds throughput, but each M6 node still holds only its own 32GB at 170GB/s [11], and the M5 Pro mini stops at 64GB [14]. A single 512GB pool is 16 times the M6's ceiling and eight times the M5 Pro's [2]. For anyone whose constraint is which weights fit rather than how fast tokens arrive, that is the only comparison on the page that matters.
Which makes this a timing problem rather than a performance-per-dollar problem. The benchmark claims will hold for a year. The order page will not: the 512GB line item is precisely the one that was withdrawn last cycle, and a budget that clears in six months may find itself buying a 96GB machine with an 80-core GPU attached to it.