Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Man, I just purchased a M2 Macbook Air 15 a few weeks back. I really wanted the M3 chip for the thermal improvements since this laptop doesn't have a fan, and especially for future proofing it. Not going to lie, despite the financial setback it would cause me, I would be tempted to upgrade to the M3 version if they release it in June.
 
If the top line M3 Max SoC proves to be as fast as Apple is saying once these computers are out in the wild, it makes the M2 Ultra Mac Pro a complete non-starter for everyone unless you’re a Pro who absolutely has to have something now for PCIe cards. Otherwise, save the $3000, buy a Mac Studio M2 Ultra or wait unless there is an actual business necessity.

Apple’s strategy right now is a little fragmented at this point, not that expecting them to have an M3 Ultra ready is a reasonable expectation, which it isn’t.

The proof will be in the pudding once the M3 Pro and M3 Max are actually released. Users really need to exercise some patience at this point. There’s so much Monday morning quarterbacking out of people who have zero clue, much less even need Pro, Max or Ultra.

It’s not just about PCIe. It’s about thunderbolt ports, it’s about real RAM, it’s about being able to spec a machine to match your workflow and it’s about Apple building a machine that is the fastest computer on the market, not the fastest MacPro.

Why would anyone spend that kind of money when we can build a PC, to spec, for less? FCP isn’t a standard anymore. Premier and Resolve are and they are both cross platform.
 
Let’s see if people vote with their wallets this generation. Will 256/8 be a good enough configuration after many years of the same? I have a feeling M3 sales won’t be as good as even M2, and definitely not M1.
The one i want is an ipad mini with a M3 equivalent processor
 
Kinda depends if Apple remembers to put the heat spreader onto the M3 this time, no?
 
On paper at least, the M3 Ultra will be equivalent to the rumored M2 Extreme (and actually faster if your workflow can use the hardware raytracing). If so, it explains why we never saw the M2 Extreme.

However, all of this still requires the software to take full advantage of the hardware. If you aren't pegging your existing hardware, then an upgrade isn't going to make much of a difference.

Sort of like buying a car with more horsepower and then driving in city traffic. Sure, you look cool (yes, I'm kidding), but all those horses under the hood remain asleep.
Yes, this is 100% true. You can even put numbers to it.

I wrote this somewhere before. The way to estimate "real world" speed up for your tasks is to..
  1. Look at your average CPU utilization on Apple's Activity Meter, Let's say it is 10%
  2. Look at the benchmarked speed increase between the two chips, Let's say you are moving from M2 to M3 so it is 20%
  3. Multiply those two numbers. So 0.10 * 0.20 = 0.02, so you would expect to see a 2% speed boost for your use case.
But if you were doing something where the activity meter reads "90%" then 0.9 * 0.2 is 18%, so you would see almost all of the 20% difference.

Your car analogy is accurate in some cases where something outside of the computer limits the speed of your work. Perhaps you are writing to kind of report in a word processor or you are watching a video. A fast computer can not make you type faster and watching a movie 20% faster is pointless. IN these cases you'd see zero improvements.

This is why I could write a document on my 1983 vintage IBM PC with floppy disks about as fast As I do now on my M2-Pro based Mac. I can only think and type so fast.
 
Man, I just purchased a M2 Macbook Air 15 a few weeks back. I really wanted the M3 chip for the thermal improvements since this laptop doesn't have a fan, and especially for future proofing it. Not going to lie, despite the financial setback it would cause me, I would be tempted to upgrade to the M3 version if they release it in June.
I would want to see some TDP numbers for the M3 variant used. Apple went from 13.8W in the M1 MacBook Air to 20W in the M2 MacBook Air. I still have questions about how much of the thermal throttling is from the absence of the traditional heat sink and how much is from shoving another 6 watts of heat into a fanless case.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SlightWince
M3 MacBook Air will be the first Apple laptop with 24 hours of battery life. Absolutely worth the wait.
Knowing Apple's marketing department, they will shrink the battery to make sure that the M3 MacBook Air doesn't challenge the M3 MacBook Pro on battery life.
 
Knowing Apple's marketing department, they will shrink the battery to make sure that the M3 MacBook Air doesn't challenge the M3 MacBook Pro on battery life.
Said Apple marketing department had no problems with the MBA having such a great battery life before, why would they start now?
 
A few thoughts on this.

[...]

One last thing, this talk about the M3 making the M2 useless is ridiculous. The only thing this makes useless is the bragging rights for M2 Ultra owners. Their equipment will still do all of the same work it did yesterday, just as fast. Technology will keep advancing and timing your buys is about certain key features that help future proof. For me, it was HW support for Ray Tracing, which is why I had not upgraded to the M1/M2. Also, complaining about things moving too fast is again just about bragging rights and people wanting to feel special. However, if I buy every 5 years, I'd rather see 5 iterations between my last buy rather than 2, just means that much more improvement between the two.
Exactly.

Does your computer do the work that you intended it for? That's it, that's the purpose.
 
I appreciate the constant march forward of technological improvement, but the increases in performance feel so incremental already that I see no reason to upgrade from my M1 iMac or my M1 Pro MBP.

I wanted an excuse to, but it just isn't there.

Maybe another year or two down the line, if not more. Made such strong computers, Apple, that I can't be bothered to upgrade.
I think it’s great that they’re upgrading whenever they can as opposed to whenever a third party (aka Intel) can. If it doesn’t cost Apple much to use new chips other than their normal cost of “operations” then why not? It’s a win/win. Just upgrade when you need to and the technology will be impressive either way.
 
Both the 13" and 15" Air will be updated together. Not expecting to see anything new other than M3 chip.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Chuckeee
All that matters is that the embarrassing emoji bar has finally been eradicated. Another vestige of Jony Ive's disastrous douchebaggery put to rest.
 
Pro should have 8/4 ratio of cores instead of 6/6.
Yup - more than 4 efficiency cores makes little sense (on any computer that manages cores like Macs do), since anything that wants a whole bunch of cores is going to try to schedule on the P-cores anyway.

The 8 e-cores on the M2 Ultra (and presumably the M3 Ultra) is ALSO a waste, but it's understandable how they got there, since that's simply two of a smaller chip attached by a high speed bus. You're not going to delete the extra e-cores.
 
  • Like
Reactions: matrix07
The M3 Pro is a sidegrade from the M2 Pro in multicore benchmarks and the memory bandwidth was cut by 25%. However, I still think it's an upgrade where it matters. The single-core performance is significantly better and that is the main bottleneck in real-world workflows, the GPU architecture is better despite lower core count, a shift from 16GB/32GB RAM configs to 18GB/36GB is a small move in the right direction, plus it's going to use less power and generate less heat due to the 3 nm process.

The M3 Pro is just such a small upgrade from M3 now that it's hard to argue that M3 Pro with base 18GB RAM is worth choosing over the M3 upgraded to 24GB at a similar price.
I think that starting with the M3, the M3 Pro chip is taking on a different role in the M3 lineup. It appears that real benefits of the M3 pro chip is to retain features obtained with a new M3 (e.g.; speed bump as compared M2, ray tracing, AV1 decoding) while providing enhanced I/O. The main benefit of M3 pro chips (as compared to the standard M3 chip) is additional interface ports and the ability to support additional external displays.

M3 pro chip is NOT intended to provide a significant CPU/GPU as compared to the M3. And it now provides a different function (more I/O) in the M3 lineup, as compared to the M2 pro chip did in the M2 lineup.

The intended market for the M3 pro chip is for potential M3 customers who need more external displays.
 
  • Like
Reactions: picpicmac
Yup - more than 4 efficiency cores makes little sense (on any computer that manages cores like Macs do), since anything that wants a whole bunch of cores is going to try to schedule on the P-cores anyway.
Exactly. Since M3 can get by with 4E cores M3 Pro should be fine as well.
 
I think that starting with the M3, the M3 Pro chip is taking on a different role in the M3 lineup. It appears that real benefits of the M3 pro chip is to retain features obtained with a new M3 (e.g.; speed bump as compared M2, ray tracing, AV1 decoding) while providing enhanced I/O. The main benefit of M3 pro chips (as compared to the standard M3 chip) is additional interface ports and the ability to support additional external displays.

M3 pro chip is NOT intended to provide a significant CPU/GPU as compared to the M3. And it now provides a different function (more I/O) in the M3 lineup, as compared to the M2 pro chip did in the M2 lineup.

The intended market for the M3 pro chip is for potential M3 customers who need more external displays.

If you pay the extra for the unbinned M3 Pro you are getting 50% better multicore CPU performance and 80% better graphics performance than the M3 and that is going to make use of the 50% higher memory bandwidth. The base binned M3 Pro is probably closer to 30% better multi-core CPU and 40% better GPU than the M3.

I am sure there is some market for that but for a lot of users it won't matter. I know for my typical workloads (multitasking + working with large files) RAM is more important than extra cores, which is why I went for the M3 with 24GB in the end.
 
I wouldn't mind if they lowered the price of the M1 Air and made that their new really low-cost entry machine. …
Not having an M1 Air, I'm betting that you don't know why the M2 Air is so much better. It has a MagSafe 3 power supply cable while the M1 Air uses a USB-C cable that takes half the available ports (there are only two) — thank you, Jon Ivie and good riddance. Having older eyes, I don't like both ports taken up by the power cable and external monitor leaving none for anything else—not a problem with the M2 Air.

Performance-wise, they are similar enough so one should be discontinued but that is the M1 Air—and it is except for the Refurb Store where there are plenty. As long as my wife likes hers, we'll be keeping it but I bought the M2 Air for myself. Just sayin...
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.