Hardware comparison
Mac Studio M5 Ultra (256GB) vs Mac mini M6 (16GB) for local LLMs
How the two stack up for running open-source LLMs locally — memory, bandwidth, price, and how many of the 69 tracked models each one can run.
Scroll sideways to compare both machines. Keyboard: focus the table, then use the arrow keys. Metric names stay visible.
| Hardware | Mac Studio M5 Ultra (256GB) | Mac mini M6 (16GB) |
|---|---|---|
| Memory | 256.0 GB (better for this comparison) | 16.0 GB |
| Bandwidth | 1228 GB/s (better for this comparison) | 153 GB/s |
| Price (approx) | $9,499Complete system | $899 (better for this comparison)Complete system |
| LLMs it runs | 65 of 69 (better for this comparison) | 30 of 69 |
| Best model it runs | Hunyuan Hy3 (MoE)Q3_K_M · estimated 52–78 tok/s | Mistral Small 3.2 24BQ2_K · estimated 10–15 tok/s |
Both prices cover complete systems. Prices are approximate catalog estimates; check current configurations and prices before buying.
The recommended models and quants differ. These estimated speeds are not a like-for-like comparison. Estimates use 4,096 context tokens, llama.cpp and one stream.
The Mac Studio M5 Ultra (256GB) runs 35 more of the tracked models (65 vs 30), thanks to its 256.0 GB of memory. The Mac Studio M5 Ultra (256GB) has more memory bandwidth (1228 GB/s). Higher bandwidth can help generation speed, but model, quant, architecture and runtime also affect the estimates.