The "nerfed" SSD in base 512GB is only slower with sequential transfers. Most computing tasks, including app launch which was asked in the OP, is more about random read access which is more or less equal on all Apple's SSD configs.
So which tasks are affected? Aside from the obvious bulk file transfer like dropping files to and from an external SSD, the most common one is exporting videos or photos from footage / RAWs that sit on the internal drive. So essentially any tasks that demand suddenly reading or dumping lots of GBs of files in and out of the internal drive, the speed of these are literally halved.
Apple does offer SSD upgrade options that are costly but in turn the benefits are considerable, namely in how fast they are (sequential). So for some workflow if you have TBs of assets and you don't want to be bottlenecked by the network or I/O, you can pay to get that. With how much Apple charges I'd say the sweetspot is between 1-2TB, where 4-8TB's asking price is way too exclusive unless you really need it.
I think the Studio starting at base 512GB is carefully placed on Apple's part. Even in professional environments, with a standard issue 10Gbe already on the ethernet port, a lot of deployments of these machines are not going to rely on the internal drives to store any data at all, as they are likely to be on an external DAS or network storage (NAS / SAS). In my case for example, Even before using my M1 Max Studio, the previous iMac 5k had a 10Gbe TB3 CalDigit card permanently connected to a 20G infrastructure of my studio network, majority of time accessing files on 20G/10G servers. The internal drives are for macOS, app installs, cache, and quick file management like unzipping etc.