Mac Studio base vs. Ultra for computation-intensive tasks

I'm just setting out in digital astrophotography. I plan to process large stacks of images with a very complex and computation-intensive program called PixInsight. This software apparently takes advantage of all available processing cores on the machine it's residing on, so I'm wondering whether the Mac Studio Ultra would offer advantages over the Studio base model.

One of the first things I've done was to process a set of ~120 images of a certain deep-sky object. This involves calibrating each image against a master, applying dark and bias images, and stacking the resulting subframes into a master with much-improved S/N ratio. The task on my MacBook Pro with M1 Max chip and 32GB of RAM, working on files stored on an external 1TB SSI, took 1 hour 55 min.

I'm planning to upgrade my desktop (not because of PixInsight) to a Mac Studio with the new Apple display. The base model is equipped exactly like the MacBook, with M1 Max processor and 32 GB RAM. I wouldn't expect PI to run any faster on this machine.

But what about a Mac Studio M1 Ultra, which has two linked M1 Max chips and therefore twice the cores, as well as twice the RAM? Given that PixInsight is a computation-intensive engine, could I expect faster processing times with the Ultra? If times were substantially shortened, I would consider springing for the upgrade just on this basis.