First Benchmark Result Surfaces for MacBook Air With M3 Chip

[6749974]

I paid $1760 with my brothers Apple employee discount. That includes Apple Care. Do you still think it's worth it? I do like that space black colour. I wish all the colours were available on all the model options. The higher end MBP doesn't get space grey which is the colour I chose.

I also watched a couple videos about thunderbolt and there doesn't seem to be much difference between 3 and 4.

I don't want to over-complicate this for you...

• But your brother's Apple employee discount would apply to a $2200 M3 Pro MacBook Pro with 16/1 just as it would a $2000 M3 MacBook Pro with 16/1
• The SSD sequential speed of the M3 model [as tested here] is 2,904 MB/s write, 2,769 MB/s read
• The SSD sequential speed of the M3 Pro model [as tested here] is 6201.1 MB/s write, 4313.6 MB/s read
• But lets be honest, most computer users can't tell the difference between 3000 MB/s and 6000 MB/s speeds, especially if you're not using pro apps with heavy workloads. It won't make web browsing any faster, or streaming a movie any faster. This mostly matters if you're a video editor or something.
• Theres not much difference between Thunderbolt 3 and 4—true—but the point I was making is that the M3 model has only two Thunderbolt ports (two on the left, none on the right) where as the M3 Pro model has three thunderbolt ports (two on the left, one on the right)...probably not a big deal to you but it matters to some people to have an extra Thunderbolt port and to have the preference or option to plug things in on the right side when needed.

I'm simply putting myself in your shoes and thinking you'd want to know the differences, but perhaps these extra features matter not to your workflow. Your brother works for Apple. Does he know your workflow. What does he say? I'm surprised he wouldn't have nudged you toward the M3 Pro; maybe he has his reasons, maybe he knows your workflow doesn't take advantage of these differences.

One benefit of sticking to the M3 model is it has 3 more hours of battery (wireless web test). So you save $200 and you get 3 more hours battery. That may be worth it to you, especially if the features of the M3 Pro model are null to you. If you're a student, for example, and you work away from a power outlet, sticking to an M3 is smart.

 

[6749974]

I realize that overall coming from a 2015 MBP it will be quite a jump. But one thing I can't seem to find is SSD speed for the M3 MBP. I ordered the 16GB/1TB option. My current 2015 15" MBP write/read is 2512/2001. Will the M3 SSD speeds be any faster? Will I notice it?

As I mentioned in my other comment, the M3 model [as tested here] is 2,904 MB/s write, 2,769 MB/s read. So that is maybe 15-20% faster than your 2015 MBP.

Will you notice? Almost nobody would notice. Does it matter? Almost not. SSD speed over 1,000 MB/s mostly matters to people like video editors working with files that are hundreds of GB in size.

 

[bigpoppamac31]

I don't want to over-complicate this for you...

• But your brother's Apple employee discount would apply to a $2200 M3 Pro MacBook Pro with 16/1 just as it would a $2000 M3 MacBook Pro with 16/1
• The SSD sequential speed of the M3 model [as tested here] is 2,904 MB/s write, 2,769 MB/s read
• The SSD sequential speed of the M3 Pro model [as tested here] is 6201.1 MB/s write, 4313.6 MB/s read
• But lets be honest, most computer users can't tell the difference between 3000 MB/s and 6000 MB/s speeds, especially if you're not using pro apps with heavy workloads. It won't make web browsing any faster, or streaming a movie any faster. This mostly matters if you're a video editor or something.
• Theres not much difference between Thunderbolt 3 and 4—true—but the point I was making is that the M3 model has only two Thunderbolt ports (two on the left, none on the right) where as the M3 Pro model has three thunderbolt ports (two on the left, one on the right)...probably not a big deal to you but it matters to some people to have an extra Thunderbolt port and to have the preference or option to plug things in on the right side when needed.

I'm simply putting myself in your shoes and thinking you'd want to know the differences, but perhaps these extra features matter not to your workflow. Your brother works for Apple. Does he know your workflow. What does he say? I'm surprised he wouldn't have nudged you toward the M3 Pro; maybe he has his reasons, maybe he knows your workflow doesn't take advantage of these differences.

One benefit of sticking to the M3 model is it has 3 more hours of battery (wireless web test). So you save $200 and you get 3 more hours battery. That may be worth it to you, especially if the features of the M3 Pro model are null to you. If you're a student, for example, and you work away from a power outlet, sticking to an M3 is smart.

I thank you for your replies. My "workflow" isn't anything more than the basics like web browsing, email, YouTube, music listening. I don't do anything like photo or video editing. My computer is just for personal use. Nothing work related. I rarely have anything plugged into my Mac so the extra usb/thunderbolt port may not matter much. If I am disappointed about anything it's that the space black colour is not available on the base M3 model. Oddly enough the space grey colour is not available on the mid and high end models. Strange decision by Apple. But I chose the 14" MBP because I think the 13" Air is too small but the 15" Air weirdly enough too big even though it's thin and light.

 

[6749974]

I thank you for your replies. My "workflow" isn't anything more than the basics like web browsing, email, YouTube, music listening. I don't do anything like photo or video editing. My computer is just for personal use. Nothing work related. I rarely have anything plugged into my Mac so the extra usb/thunderbolt port may not matter much. If I am disappointed about anything it's that the space black colour is not available on the base M3 model. Oddly enough the space grey colour is not available on the mid and high end models. Strange decision by Apple. But I chose the 14" MBP because I think the 13" Air is too small but the 15" Air weirdly enough too big even though it's thin and light.

Fair reasons. Knowing your workflow is basic, no gaming or media editing, then in a blind-test and from a performance perspective, you wouldn't be able to tell your experience apart when switching between one and the other. So you might as well save around $200 and get extra battery life out of the M3 model.

Cheers.

 

[Pablo Huang]

I call BS.

In what world is someone with a 256 GB drive in a MacBook Air going to go, "wow, my laptop is slow due to drive speed, I need to upgrade."

1500 MB/s is 3x faster than most anybody needs storage. It opens a 1 GB file in a fraction of a second. Most people are dealing in files that are MB in size.

The people ingesting terabytes of 8K footage aren't buying 256 GB drives, and not MacBook Airs.

Only BS until you upgrade your three-year-old MacBook Air 8/256 to any single-chip. Then whoever using the 'hand me down' is so happy with it and you are wondering why the old computer is running faster.

It's not how adequate it is, but how the performance is degraded in certain ways compared to the old one. Most users would expect the new computer to be better than the old one in _every way_.

I am talking about dozens of casual users who went from 8/256 (2020 M1) to the M2 or M3 8/256 against my 16GB/512 upgrade for the sake of longevity. Most of them have returned them in exchange of the 16/512 that I recommended in the first place, except the 70+ crowd.

 

[6749974]

Only BS until you upgrade your three-year-old MacBook Air 8/256 to any single-chip. Then whoever using the 'hand me down' is so happy with it and you are wondering why the old computer is running faster.

Mind rephrasing that? I'm not following your implication.

It's not how adequate it is, but how the performance is degraded in certain ways compared to the old one. Most users would expect the new computer to be better than the old one in _every way_.

A smart person cares about real world impact above numbers on spec sheets. If you can switch a 512 GB Air with a 256 GB Air, and the user can't tell the difference, and there is no detrimental impact, then its not detrimental by definition.

Truth is you can't point to a million MacBook Air users and say their experience is worse. You can't.

1500 MB/s sequential speeds don't bottleneck computer processes of casual users. Even transfer speeds are unlikely to be bottlenecked because most USB 3.2 SSD external drives only do 1000 MB/s.

I am talking about dozens of casual users who went from 8/256 (2020 M1) to the M2 or M3 8/256 against my 16GB/512 upgrade for the sake of longevity. Most of them have returned them in exchange of the 16/512 that I recommended in the first place, except the 70+ crowd.

Then you caused dozens of casual users to waste $200-400 on baseless fears, maybe more given that base models are on sale for $200 off and 16/512 were hard to find on sale.

 

[chucker23n1]

A smart person cares about real world impact above numbers on spec sheets. If you can switch a 512 GB Air with a 256 GB Air, and the user can't tell the difference, and there is no detrimental impact, then its not detrimental by definition.

Truth is you can't point to a million MacBook Air users and say their experience is worse. You can't.

1500 MB/s sequential speeds don't bottleneck computer processes of casual users. Even transfer speeds are unlikely to be bottlenecked because most USB 3.2 SSD external drives only do 1000 MB/s.

Agreed.

If 256 is enough for you, then you'll rarely hit peak throughput, so the slightly slower speeds will be, too. This was an overblown issue.

 

[Pablo Huang]

Mind rephrasing that? I'm not following your implication.

A smart person cares about real world impact above numbers on spec sheets. If you can switch a 512 GB Air with a 256 GB Air, and the user can't tell the difference, and there is no detrimental impact, then its not detrimental by definition.

Truth is you can't point to a million MacBook Air users and say their experience is worse. You can't.

1500 MB/s sequential speeds don't bottleneck computer processes of casual users. Even transfer speeds are unlikely to be bottlenecked because most USB 3.2 SSD external drives only do 1000 MB/s.


Then you caused dozens of casual users to waste $200-400 on baseless fears, maybe more given that base models are on sale for $200 off and 16/512 were hard to find on sale.

They have not wasted money. I put an old (2020 M1) next to the M2 or M3 for side-by-side operation and the result is obvious. It's about knowing what you get and how it will behave three years down the road. They did not waste any money. Advocating ignorance is costly. Going with the 8GB/256 (single chip, not 128 x2, striped) may adequately serve the current user, but after three years, it's going to be undesirable by any standards).

 

[6749974]

They have not wasted money.

Yes they wasted money.

• They either don't need the performance—in which case they wasted their money buying storage they didn't need
• Or they need the performance, in which case their priority should be upgrading RAM to 16 GB and not buying 512 GB storage

You can see in Image A (attached) and Image B (attached)—that the 16 GB model performs almost twice as fast as a 512 GB model—when dealing with large files. So we can conclude the following:

• Casual? → buy the base model
• Not Casual or want occasional performance? → upgrade RAM to 16 GB RAM or 24 GB RAM

A person should only be buying 512 GB because they need the storage, not because they seek performance. That's silly.

I put an old (2020 M1) next to the M2 or M3 for side-by-side operation and the result is obvious.

Thats silly. We know you're bending truth because the base model M3 Air has two NAND chips equivalent to the M1 model so how can an M1 beat a faster M3 at anything even by your logic? Your credibility is fading here.

Going with the 8GB/256 (single chip, not 128 x2, striped) may adequately serve the current user, but after three years, it's going to be undesirable by any standards).

Once again, if a user is worried about longevity, a 16 GB model will suffice for many more years than a 512 GB model as far as performance is concerned.

Go tell your opinions to someone with a computer engineering degree and then relay what their feedback is. I assure you they will agree with me that casual users are fine with 8/256 despite one NAND chip, or if they are worried about performance for pro applications and multitasking, then the first upgrade needs to be 16 GB RAM—not 512 GB storage.

 

[chucker23n1]

It's not how adequate it is, but how the performance is degraded in certain ways compared to the old one. Most users would expect the new computer to be better than the old one in _every way_.

I just don't see this scenario where people 1) would benefit from higher throughput (which sounds like a much higher number, but only makes a different in edge cases), but also 2) are fine with 256 Gigs of storage. Once you add the storage space, you get the higher throughput anyway. So whom exactly is this debate for?

 

[jdb8167]

They have not wasted money. I put an old (2020 M1) next to the M2 or M3 for side-by-side operation and the result is obvious.

I'm fairly certain you didn't see a difference side-by-side with an M3 since the M3 went back to 2 128GB NAND chips. So your claiming practical experience is suspect.

Base Model M3 MacBook Air Has Faster SSD Speeds After Controversy With Previous Model