These so called waste of time take less time every month than cooking dinner in just one night.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Which M2 Air/M3 Max Dynamic Duo Would You Take of These?
- Thread starter sidgriffey
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
These so called waste of time take less time every month than cooking dinner in just one night.
Maybe but in the end it still wastes more time than will be saved by the marginal performance gains (for her use case) provided by M3 Max vs M1 Max.
Yeah I wouldn't recommend anything M1 now. The gains in the M3 Max real world tests and use are really strong.
I'm a "8GB is enough for most people" guy myself. But, I wouldn't feel comfortable recommending 8GB because he is a student, and students *MIGHT* have to use Windows based programs that do use a lot of RAM. Programs like Crystal Ball or another analytical program.
I'd say 16GB just to give him some room.
Yeah, same here. Why two laptops? Makes no sense. Get a good monitor for your desk.
Or, if you need two computers, get one desktop and one laptop. Doesn't seem like you have a need for two laptops when one is really just sitting at home.
Also, I'm a PhD here. Reading academic articles and videos does not require two separate computers. In fact, it doesn't even require more than one external monitor!
As a shareholder, thank you ! On a most serious note, I'd take the same route as I did, get the 14'. I could not bear having to fuss with the lesser display for what is a marginal weight saving.
THE PLOT THICKENS…
I got the M2 15” Air to try it out, and I kind of love it. I’m almost of the mindset that it could be my large screen option. Still, I am tempted by the m3 14” pro
I got the M2 15” Air to try it out, and I kind of love it. I’m almost of the mindset that it could be my large screen option. Still, I am tempted by the m3 14” pro
Buy a refurbished 16-inch M2 Pro. You'll save a bunch over the M3 and not be giving up anything that would be relevant to your use case.
Stop asking for validation, this thread has already gone beyond what could be considered consumer advice.
I got the 14" M1 Max 64GB/2TB because I love the portability and I need at least some of the power (more like the RAM) to make sure it doesn't lag when running Mainstage when I play keyboards with my band. Having that much portable power means I don't really have a need for anything else when I'm at home, except my gaming desktop PC on occasion.
I'd recommend a single laptop solution, and in my case if I ever need a larger screen I've got my PC, screen sharing from my MBP to our 65" TV with ATV, my wife's 16" MBP M1 Pro, or her 27" iMac. The 16" is nice, and I had a 17" MBP back in the day, but it just wouldn't work for me as I take my laptop with me to work every day on public transit, so it sits on my back for a couple hours and I don't need the extra weight.
Anyways, from my personal experience a gaming PC desktop and a MBP for my laptop has been a winning combo for a couple decades, now.
I'd recommend a single laptop solution, and in my case if I ever need a larger screen I've got my PC, screen sharing from my MBP to our 65" TV with ATV, my wife's 16" MBP M1 Pro, or her 27" iMac. The 16" is nice, and I had a 17" MBP back in the day, but it just wouldn't work for me as I take my laptop with me to work every day on public transit, so it sits on my back for a couple hours and I don't need the extra weight.
Anyways, from my personal experience a gaming PC desktop and a MBP for my laptop has been a winning combo for a couple decades, now.
Sure people "who traded in their 16” Pro for a 15” Air say you can hardly notice the difference without the machines side-by-side." They want to justify buying the low end to themselves.
Fact is that the MBP is better in every regard except weight and price. Computers are tools to me, and a lifetime of experience says using better tools is almost always worth paying the price. But you can A-B compare yourself.
I do the same. Except both are 15"/16" MBPs. The RAM-limited 2016 MBP is used for cafes, bed, sofa. The mobile workstation is an M2 Max MBP that is mostly used plugged in to three 4K displays.
Agreed. In the old days maintaining two boxes was a PITA, but with modern Mac OS versions and the cloud it is now pretty effortless.
Only Filemaker remains a PITA, and that is solely because Filemaker management has evolved to be horrifically greedy, much like Adobe has done. I still use FMP but have pretty much stopped developing outside apps because of the direction management has taken the app.
Last question:
Is the 16” M3 Pro MacBook Pro 18gb 1TB SSD sufficient build for someone who does a lot of typing, zoom for work, wants the nicer screen and battery but doesn’t do video editing/photo shop etc? Or is the m2 15” air better (16gb 1tb ssd)?
Is the 16” M3 Pro MacBook Pro 18gb 1TB SSD sufficient build for someone who does a lot of typing, zoom for work, wants the nicer screen and battery but doesn’t do video editing/photo shop etc? Or is the m2 15” air better (16gb 1tb ssd)?
1) The Air is never better, it is only lighter and cheaper while remaining adequate for your described needs. MBP provides better display, better speakers, more ports, more available RAM (a huge plus), more memory bandwidth, AV1 decode, up to 8 TB SSD, WiFi 6E (quite relevant in my world) and supports up to four external displays instead of just one. MBP life cycles will be longer if equipped with proper RAM, not just the least available. MBP cons are that the MBP weighs 0.65 kg more and has only two colors available. The MBP is a far more competent computer than an MBA, so it costs more.
2) An M2 or M3 MBP with Pro chip will be fine, but I strongly recommend more than 18 GB RAM, even though 18 GB RAM will work fine today, and Mac OS will probably always make your demands run under 18 GB. But over the life cycle of that box 18 GB will likely be limiting, and it makes no sense to constrain a pricey computer by installing suboptimal RAM. Get 32/36 GB (or more if you want to really future-proof; I bought 96).
3) A good buying rule of thumb is that SSD size should be 2x the maximum capacity you anticipate installing over the life cycle of the box.
Frankly any M-series Mac will be powerful enough to meet your performance needs, especially when supplied with enough RAM to avoid paging. In terms of performance, RAM is where you will most likely feel the differences over time.
Last edited:
Nothing you've mentioned even HINTS at needing more power than the M1 Max 16".
Personally the 16" Pro is a fine travel machine, and I pair mine with an iPad mini. But if you want a 3rd device (besides that and your iPad), go for it. It's only money!
I have issues ... lol.... here we have the 15" M2 Air (16gb ram, 1tb ssd, can return), my 16" M1 Max (32gb ram, 1tb), the 16" M3 Max (32gb ram, 1tb, can return), and my 13" M2 Air (24gb ram, 1tb) at bottom. I want to keep two and return or trade two....
Saying you "would immediately cross out any "Max" line is a mistake because:
1) Buying a generation or two back and buying a Max chip can be very cost effective and more performant.
2) Buying a max chip allows one to add higher amounts of RAM which is often smart configuring.
Even at the latest level M3 the extra cost of a Max chip with almost twice as many GPU cores and 1 TB SSD instead of 512 GB SSD adds ~$600. Hella worth $600 IMO; both at 36 GB RAM, which is the minimum anyone but K-12 or granny with email should buy for a 2023-2029 life cycle M3 box.
In general an M1 Max chip is stronger than M3 base and probably similar strength to M3 Pro, but the M3 by definition has a few years longer OS upgrades, etc. Longer life cycle by definition. And other tech items buried in the specs list should also be compared: e.g. WiFi, Bluetooth, display specs, HDMI, etc. YMMV; e.g. WiFi 6E is important to me but not to everyone.
Over the long term the RAM on board changes everything. My guess is both described boxes are RAM-limited, because most folks (inappropriately IMO) look backward to "what ran last year" when choosing RAM instead of doing the harder work of looking forward and asking "what will my computer need to drive/optimize for in 2028? what direction is Apple going with RAM usage, etc.?"
Last edited:
I have an 8GB MacBook Air M1. I can't seem to push the Ram limit doing video work, web page, and development. Why would someone in academia need 32GB to write papers using Scrivener/ Word/ Zotero, and to do Zoom (or Teams? Or Skype?) therapy sessions?
It is a waste of time and money to look forward to 2028 and try to determine future needs as well as what hardware and apps may look like that far down the tech line. Macs are not an investment and people around here need to stop trying to treat them as such.
A person should buy for what he or she needs today. Future Proofing is a misnomer and is a waste of money, especially when it comes to personal use computing. I see many, many forum members on here giving out bad purchase advise and inviting others to spend way more than needed. It is easy to say get 36, 64, 96 RAM when it isn't your (plural use) money being spent.
The reason so many on here can't make a buying decision and get emotionally paralyzed, is because they have gotten lost in numbers and specs instead of focusing on the user experience, which is ultimately the bottom line. Macs are tools not commodities and definitely not to be treated as fine art work.
The fact that the OP has 4 computers and still can't make his mind up shows that he overbuying his real needs
You suggest that It is a waste of time and money to look forward and that A person should buy for what he or she needs today. Clearly I disagree. ;~)
Sure we are guessing about future needs, but some trends have not changed in 40+ years of Apple computers. Apple II kept growing from 4k IIRC to 64k, then the Mac came out with 128k; over the next 39 years k became MB then GB and now we are at 128 GB available RAM in a MBP. That trend will continue over the 3-6 year life cycle of new boxes being purchased now ~12/23.
It does not take a computer scientist or long experience or heavy research to see the trend. Configuring a $2,000-$4,000 computing tool based upon what worked last year when we know RAM demands by OS and apps will constantly increase is simply bad configuring.