15" M2 Air or 14" MBP M2 Pro (Refurbished) for Computer Science?

[teh_hunterer]

The base M2 has a horrible SSD that is slower than the base M1. Please do not buy any base M2 Machine, be it an Air or Pro. Either get a base M1 or M2 with an upgraded SSD, which would be 512GB for the MBA and 1TB for the M2 MBP.

What base M2 are you talking about? The SSD in the M2 Pro is different to the SSD in the M2. So the base config of an M2 MacBook Air has an SSD that's far slower than the base config of an M2 Pro MacBook Pro.

"It's half as fast" is meaningless unless you know what it's half as fast as, and still meaningless unless you know what kind of real world performance that translates into. Until then, you're just uninformed and spreading incomplete info.

Generally, the speed of a base config MacBook Air is disappointing, and potentially an issue, but the speed of a base config MacBook Pro is usually fine, as it's a much faster SSD than the Air.

 

[Mity]

What base M2 are you talking about? The SSD in the M2 Pro is different to the SSD in the M2. So the base config of an M2 MacBook Air has an SSD that's far slower than the base config of an M2 Pro MacBook Pro.

"It's half as fast" is meaningless unless you know what it's half as fast as, and still meaningless unless you know what kind of real world performance that translates into. Until then, you're just uninformed and spreading incomplete info.

Generally, the speed of a base config MacBook Air is disappointing, and potentially an issue, but the speed of a base config MacBook Pro is usually fine, as it's a much faster SSD than the Air.

Stating read/write speeds is spreading misinfo? Showing horrendous file transfer speeds is misinfo? Showing negligible compile time differences between M1 and M2 is misinfo? Showing that to save around a $1 on a $2k machine, Apple put an inferior SSD in the base M2 models is pure Wall Street cuckery is spreading misinfo? I guess all the YouTube videos and articles I linked are all spreading misinfo then.

My opinion, based on all the reviews that I've come across, is that any M1 machine is a better buy than any M2 machine because of the money you save and virtually no hit in performance from buying the previous gen. And on top of that, you get a better SSD!

I will link this again because MKBHD's words carry more weight than mine do:

Oh no, look at the "misinformation" he's spreading!:​

Regarding the M2 Air:

• "A $1200 computer should not have 256GB of storage...it's pretty disappointing."
• "But even at that price, not even is it not a lot of storage, but it's particularly slow."
• "So you end up with this like half read, half write speed that kinda gets annoying when you get into memory swap territory....you start to slow down and you notice it's not performing like it usually does."
• "I highly, highly recommend upgrading from that base to get at least that 500gigs of storage."

 

[Apple_Robert]

Stating read/write speeds is spreading misinfo? Showing horrendous file transfer speeds is misinfo? Showing negligible compile time differences between M1 and M2 is misinfo? Showing that to save around a $1 on a $2k machine, Apple put an inferior SSD in the base M2 models is pure Wall Street cuckery is spreading misinfo? I guess all the YouTube videos and articles I linked are all spreading misinfo then.

My opinion, based on all the reviews that I've come across, is that any M1 machine is a better buy than any M2 machine because of the money you save and virtually no hit in performance from buying the previous gen. And on top of that, you get a better SSD!

I will link this again because MKBHD's words carry more weight than mine do:

Oh no, look at the "misinformation" he's spreading!:​

Regarding the M2 Air:

• "A $1200 computer should not have 256GB of storage...it's pretty disappointing."
• "But even at that price, not even is it not a lot of storage, but it's particularly slow."
• "So you end up with this like half read, half write speed that kinda gets annoying when you get into memory swap territory....you start to slow down and you notice it's not performing like it usually does."
• "I highly, highly recommend upgrading from that base to get at least that 500gigs of storage."

A YouTube Influencer is not the benchmark. His words carry no more weight than any of us.

 

[Mity]

A YouTube Influencer is not the benchmark. His words carry no more weight than any of us.

OP asked for opinions. I gave mine and provided justifications, which included professional reviews. Some people disagreed. No big deal. Their opinions will also help the OP choose according to his/her desire.

If you want to now focus on the medium to diminish the value of my justifications and not the actual content, that's a convo I don't want to have. But I am happy to discuss why anyone should pay more to get the same performance.

 

[Apple_Robert]

OP asked for opinions. I gave mine and provided justifications, which included professional reviews. Some people disagreed. No big deal. Their opinions will also help the OP choose according to his/her desire.

If you want to now focus on the medium to diminish the value of my justifications and not the actual content, that's a convo I don't want to have. But I am happy to discuss why anyone should pay more to get the same performance.

You are welcome to your opinion. My point was your opinion is not bolstered by posting MKHD talking points as some kind of 'silence the critics proof' of a subjective opinion.

The fact is there is no right or wrong answer with the OP's question. Either Mac can do the job and do it well. Whether or not the OP will be happy with one or the other is something only he can decide.

 

[teh_hunterer]

Stating read/write speeds is spreading misinfo?

Yes, you are selectively leaving out information so as to misrepresent the actual situation. Whether you are doing it on purpose or not I don't know.

The base model M2 Pro with a 512GB SSD at half the speed of the 1TB version, has read speed scores of around 2,970 MB/s and write speed scores of around 3,150 MB/s.

The M1 MacBook Air reached 1719 MB/s for writing and 2865 MB/s read.

The SSD speeds of a base model M2 MacBook Air are actually pretty bad. The SSD speeds of a base model M2 Pro MacBook Pro are actually fairly decent.

As I said before, yes it's half the speed - but what is it half of?

 

[Mity]

Yes, you are selectively leaving out information so as to misrepresent the actual situation. Whether you are doing it on purpose or not I don't know.

The base model M2 Pro with a 512GB SSD at half the speed of the 1TB version, has read speed scores of around 2,970 MB/s and write speed scores of around 3,150 MB/s.

The M1 MacBook Air reached 1719 MB/s for writing and 2865 MB/s read.

The SSD speeds of a base model M2 MacBook Air are actually pretty bad. The SSD speeds of a base model M2 Pro MacBook Pro are actually fairly decent.

As I said before, yes it's half the speed - but what is it half of?

What information did I leave out?

Did I not clearly state that it is half of the M1???

https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/15-m2-air-or-14-mbp-m2-pro-refurbished-for-computer-science.2392891/post-32251452

And as I've stated before, it is expected that every new iteration is better than the last in every sense. It is right to assume that the base M2 MBA/P SSD should be faster than the base M1 MBA/P SSD, which is not the case. Why should I have to justify this?

 

[altaic]

Did I not clearly state that it is half of the M1???

https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/15-m2-air-or-14-mbp-m2-pro-refurbished-for-computer-science.2392891/post-32251452

As many have stated, all of the SSDs in ASi Macs are plenty fast for a CS student. It’s irrelevant and the posts arguing about it are off topic. Maybe start a different thread? Or better yet just add to the existing ones?

 

[Mity]

As many have stated, all of the SSDs in ASi Macs are plenty fast for a CS student. It’s irrelevant and the posts arguing about it are off topic. Maybe start a different thread? Or better yet just add to the existing ones?

If someone replies to me to challenge my opinion, I'm going to reply back.

 

[teh_hunterer]

What information did I leave out?

The actual numbers. All your conclusions are about the M1 and M2 chips, yet you posted numbers from the M1 Pro and M2 Pro chips.

The M2 base model having half the SSD speeds of the M1 base model is a real issue, because the resultant speeds actually impact performance in a meaningful way. It's a slow SSD.

The M2 Pro base model having half the SSD speeds of the M1 Pro base model isn't much of an issue at all, because the resultant speeds don't really impact performance in a meaningful way. It's a fast SSD.

Your conclusion doesn't add up - so the M1 base is better because the SSD is faster than the M2 base. OK. But the M2 Pro base has a much faster SSD than the M1 base - but that's not fast enough?

There is some truth to the statement that the next generation of a product should be better than the one before, but the numbers and conclusions you're throwing around are still mostly nonsense.

 

[arw]

Wow, so nowadays >1400 3000 MB/s Read & Write speeds are 'horrible' and everyone is recommended to pay the hefty upcharge without actually knowing the hypothetical benefit for the individual buyer?
It may not be misinformation per definition, but…

 

[Mity]

I am genuinely convinced that either you have reading comprehension issues or are finding some way to throw off what I've written and linked previously.

The actual numbers. All your conclusions are about the M1 and M2 chips, yet you posted numbers from the M1 Pro and M2 Pro chips.

I provided numbers on M1 MBA vs M2 MBA here: https://forums.macrumors.com/thread...ed-for-computer-science.2392891/post-32251434

I provided numbers on M1 MBP vs M2 MBP here: https://forums.macrumors.com/thread...ed-for-computer-science.2392891/post-32251452

The reason for providing stats on MBA and MBP was because OP was trying to decide between an Air and a Pro. My posts contain links for those that care to read/watch.

The M2 base model having half the SSD speeds of the M1 base model is a real issue, because the resultant speeds actually impact performance in a meaningful way. It's a slow SSD.

Yes! Exactly as I showed here: https://forums.macrumors.com/thread...ed-for-computer-science.2392891/post-32306329

The M2 Pro base model having half the SSD speeds of the M1 Pro base model isn't much of an issue at all, because the resultant speeds don't really impact performance in a meaningful way. It's a fast SSD.

This is your opinion. It is contrary to mine and to MKBHD and to MaxTech. And if you're coding in Python or R, you're using quite a bit of memory. I have 64GB of RAM in my 2019 16" MBP. I am able to run large scripts where I manipulate many dataframes without any issue. I would not be able to do so if I only had 16GB of RAM like in the M2 Pro. If (s)he has the same needs, it would be much better to have a faster SSD since swap will be utilized.

Your conclusion doesn't add up - so the M1 base is better because the SSD is faster than the M2 base. OK. But the M2 Pro base has a much faster SSD than the M1 base - but that's not fast enough?

There is some truth to the statement that the next generation of a product should be better than the one before, but the numbers and conclusions you're throwing around are still mostly nonsense.

I think this may explain your confusion. I am not comparing MBA speeds with MBP speeds. I'm comparing M1 generation with M2 generation in general.

If you read this post on the first page, you'll see that I wrote M2 machine (not M2 chip): https://forums.macrumors.com/thread...ed-for-computer-science.2392891/post-32251452 "The base M2 has a horrible SSD that is slower than the base M1. Please do not buy any base M2 Machine, be it an Air or Pro. Either get a base M1 or M2 with an upgraded SSD, which would be 512GB for the MBA and 1TB for the M2 MBP."

And also here where I break out the NAND chips: https://forums.macrumors.com/thread...ed-for-computer-science.2392891/post-32252434

*Read the above two posts again, and carefully this time.*

- - - - -

I'll clearly state my position again for the nth time and hopefully the last time. It is my opinion, that an M1 machine (whether it's an MBA or MBP) is a better buy than an M2 machine for school because the incremental improvement isn't worth the extra price. A person will pay less for an M1 machine and at the same time get a faster SSD if (s)he buys the base model.

 

[Mity]

Wow, so nowadays >3000 MB/s Read & Write speeds are 'horrible' and everyone is recommended to pay the hefty upcharge without actually knowing the hypothetical benefit for the individual buyer?
It may not be misinformation per definition, but…

You may want to read my posts because that is not what I am recommending. I think the whole reason Apple manufactured this issue is to force people to upgrade. And that's exactly why I have stated that a base M1 machine (either Air or Pro) is a better buy than a base M2 machine. And if (s)he does not want a base model, then to upgrade the SSD.

 

[teh_hunterer]

I am genuinely convinced that either you have reading comprehension issues or are finding some way to throw off what I've written and linked previously.

Geez, I don't even know where to start with all of this, except to say you seem to be projecting pretty hard here.

I don't believe MKBHD ever made a big deal of the half SSD speed talking about the M2 Pro MacBook Pros, just the MacBook Airs. Did he even mention it in his M2 Pro/Max 14"/16" MBP review?

You seem to be obsessed with some weird agenda around SSD speeds and you're throwing up info about the MacBook Air SSDs and then throwing around conclusions that wrongly include the MacBook Pro SSDs.

Ultimately, you seem unable to admit or comprehend that concerns about the base model M2 Pro MacBook Pro SSD speed is vastly overblown and ignoring the reality that it's still plenty fast.

 

[arw]

In all fairness, I also misread it, but @Mity never criticized the M2 Pro MacBook Pro, only the M2 non-Pro MacBook Pro (13"). S/he only linked the M2 Pro speed graphs for demonstrating M1 vs. M2 speeds.
(I still deem even 1400 MB/s more than sufficient for most users unless specific applications or swap demands for it)

 

[Rnd-chars]

Wow, this thread has really gone off the rails. Somehow folks have zeroed in on SSD speeds when we’re talking about a CS student’s work.

For context, I’ve been programming for about 24 years and have led 100+ person engineering teams (recently focused on real-time analytics and AI). I’m sure there are more hands-on technical folks than me in this forum, but I just wanted to provide a little background for what I’m about to say next.

I still stand by my earlier post — either machine will be more than adequate for this person’s needs. And it’s still the non-dev use cases (eg streaming, lugging from class to class, etc) that will most likely clarify what machine is right for them. Another poster stated that screen size is likely to have the biggest impact for a person at this level. Considering the compute performance of both machines, that’s an absolutely valid perspective, though I might argue for screen resolution (aka information density) than size alone.

As for SSD, they are both quite fast in this context. CS work encompasses a lot of different flows so it’s impossible to state any absolutes, but one of the universal ones is compilation time, which is seek dependent. Sustained write speeds rarely show up in build times (at least in a meaningful way) because much of the build process is spent linking assemblies, so it can largely be ignored. Yes, you’ll occasionally need to copy large images from A to B, but:
1) this is rare. Optimize for your primary use case
2) (I can’t stress this enough) we’re talking about university-level difficulty — not working at Apple on operating systems. Even the worst case scenario here is still designed to work well on an average laptop and would likely be considered trivial by an E1in the field (though that doesn’t diminish the impact of the lesson, OP 😃)

I think sometimes folks are so interested in being “right” that they lose perspective, which is how we wound up here.

Anyway, OP, good luck with your degree and I’m sure either machine will serve you well! Oh, and follow the work that interests you rather than what’s recommended by some Internet listicle. If you’re excited and good at something, you’ll move faster and more easily than those who are doing it because they “should” (and the inverse applies, too) 😉

 

[Mity]

Geez, I don't even know where to start with all of this, except to say you seem to be projecting pretty hard here.

I don't believe MKBHD ever made a big deal of the half SSD speed talking about the M2 Pro MacBook Pros, just the MacBook Airs. Did he even mention it in his M2 Pro/Max 14"/16" MBP review?

You seem to be obsessed with some weird agenda around SSD speeds and you're throwing up info about the MacBook Air SSDs and then throwing around conclusions that wrongly include the MacBook Pro SSDs.

Did you not see the other videos I linked or the articles?

Ultimately, you seem unable to admit or comprehend that concerns about the base model M2 Pro MacBook Pro SSD speed is vastly overblown and ignoring the reality that it's still plenty fast.

Unlike you, my goal is not to applaud Apple's bad decisions and help Tim Cook buy another vacation home in Aspen. There's a reason why M2 gen Mac sales haven't been strong; it's partly because the M1 gen Macs were THAT good! Again, as the MKBHD vid shows.

So, a new M1 Pro base 14" MBP for $1800 (and even cheaper at $1600 if you can still find them at Costco or Best Buy) or refurbished M2 Pro base 14" for $1700 (per the prices on the first page) was the question that led to this. Again, in IMO, given the SSD speeds that I linked previously, I would go with the new M1 machine than a refurbished M2 machine.

Edit: I just checked and a new M1 MBP is still $1600.

 

[mslilyelise]

Did you not see the other videos I linked or the articles?



Unlike you, my goal is not to applaud Apple's bad decisions and help Tim Cook buy another vacation home in Aspen. There's a reason why M2 gen Mac sales haven't been strong; it's partly because the M1 gen Macs were THAT good! Again, as the MKBHD vid shows.

So, a new M1 Pro base 14" MBP for $1800 (and even cheaper at $1600 if you can still find them at Costco or Best Buy) or refurbished M2 Pro base 14" for $1700 (per the prices on the first page) was the question that led to this. Again, in IMO, given the SSD speeds that I linked previously, I would go with the new M1 machine than a refurbished M2 machine.

Edit: I just checked and a new M1 MBP is still $1600.

So, why are you here, exactly? To help the OP, or to complain about SSD stats? This thread is like, 30% input based on what the OP is concerned about, and 70% you picking fights with forum members over benchmarks and then accusing us of belonging to a cult and flagrantly printing money for Tim Cook if we disagree with you. This is not welcoming or helpful behaviour.

Great. You're right. The SSD is faster in non-base systems. You happy? Can we move on?

So I'll be returning to school to study Computer Science and my 2015 MBP is on it's last legs. It's about time for an upgrade. I'm trying to decide between a new 15" M2 MacBook Air or the MacBook Pro 14" M2 Pro (a refurbished one is around the same price). I'm going to 16 GB of Ram on whichever model I choose.

Any advice on which to choose? Thanks.

Hi OP. Hope you'll see this response between all the nonsense.

Clearly, if you're picking up a model with 16GB of memory, it's probably worth it to get a bigger SSD while you're at it, just for future proofing's sake. 256GB isn't a lot anymore. Also it'll be faster, if you hadn't realized. 😒

I have a 13" M2 Air, and I find it to have plenty of muscle for running VMs, playing games, encoding DVDs for archival purposes, etc. You could opt for the Pro and get a beefier processor if you're doing a lot of science/math modelling or calculations. It might save you some time, depends on your apps whether that will be noticeable.

I used to have a 2015 MBP and prior to that, a 2010 MacBook unibody, both systems were 4-5lbs. Add that to textbooks and binders and you really notice it there. On the other hand, I regularly forget my M2 Air is in my backpack. It's barely there. A new MBP may only be a pound heavier, but every pound you can save off your back helps you. Trust a gal who wrecked her back in university. 😅

Hope you find what works best for you.

 

[Mity]

So, why are you here, exactly? To help the OP, or to complain about SSD stats? This thread is like, 30% input based on what the OP is concerned about, and 70% you picking fights with forum members over benchmarks and then accusing us of belonging to a cult and flagrantly printing money for Tim Cook if we disagree with you. This is not welcoming or helpful behaviour.

Great. You're right. The SSD is faster in non-base systems. You happy? Can we move on?

You have it backwards. It was just people providing their opinions until post 26, when someone began insulting me, all because (s)he didn't read what I wrote properly. You can't expect me to not respond.

 

[teh_hunterer]

Did you not see the other videos I linked or the articles?

To my knowledge, MKBHD has never made a big deal about M2 Pro SSD speeds. I watched his review just a couple days ago and I don't even think he mentioned it. The videos were talking about the MacBook Air SSD speeds, or just that the M1 Max was good enough for him not to bother upgrading. He never once said he was sticking with the M1 Max for the SSD speeds.

Unlike you, my goal is not to applaud Apple's bad decisions and help Tim Cook buy another vacation home in Aspen.

Why would that be my goal?

So, a new M1 Pro base 14" MBP for $1800 (and even cheaper at $1600 if you can still find them at Costco or Best Buy) or refurbished M2 Pro base 14" for $1700 (per the prices on the first page) was the question that led to this. Again, in IMO, given the SSD speeds that I linked previously, I would go with the new M1 machine than a refurbished M2 machine.

Edit: I just checked and a new M1 MBP is still $1600.

I use an M1 Pro 14" MBP and I love it. No need to upgrade to M2 Pro, and if someone can find a great deal today on the computer I have, I'd tell them to go for it.

That doesn't mean the SSD speed particularly of the base M2 Pro is a problem, because it isn't. Even at half the speed of the M1 Pro, it's simply fast enough to not be an issue.

You seem to be trying to apply the decently reasonable uproar about the M2 MacBook Air SSD speeds, to the M2 Pro speeds, which when you look at the actual numbers is just silly. The slowest M2 Pro SSD is faster than the M1 SSD ever was.

 

[teh_hunterer]

In all fairness, I also misread it, but @Mity never criticized the M2 Pro MacBook Pro, only the M2 non-Pro MacBook Pro (13"). S/he only linked the M2 Pro speed graphs for demonstrating M1 vs. M2 speeds.
(I still deem even 1400 MB/s more than sufficient for most users unless specific applications or swap demands for it)

That's not true. Their first post said "Please do not buy any base M2 Machine, be it an Air or Pro." and directly below that were benchmarks of the M2 Pro and M1 Pro MacBook Pros.

They probably just didn't realise there is a difference between the Pro SSDs and Air SSDs, but they came out swinging so hard with such an over the top proclamation that they can't just admit it.

 

[Mity]

That's not true. Their first post said "Please do not buy any base M2 Machine, be it an Air or Pro." and directly below that were benchmarks of the M2 Pro and M1 Pro MacBook Pros.

They probably just didn't realise there is a difference between the Pro SSDs and Air SSDs, but they came out swinging so hard with such an over the top proclamation that they can't just admit it.

My gosh, this so pathetic. Why did you leave out the rest of my quote? To make it sound like you can actually read? Note the last sentence. The "M1 or M2" refers to the generation. Again for the nth time.

https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/15-m2-air-or-14-mbp-m2-pro-refurbished-for-computer-science.2392891/post-32251452

"The base M2 has a horrible SSD that is slower than the base M1. Please do not buy any base M2 Machine, be it an Air or Pro. Either get a base M1 or M2 with an upgraded SSD, which would be 512GB for the MBA and 1TB for the M2 MBP."

Do you see how it says "be it an Air or Pro?" And how it breaks out 512GB for the MBA and 1TB for the MBP?

I've already explained that you misconstrued M2 machine with the M2 chip, as I explained here but you won't accept your mistake. Now you're just deliberately and desperately stating the same thing over again. https://forums.macrumors.com/thread...ed-for-computer-science.2392891/post-32306526

I salute your reading comprehension skills.

 

[kschendel]

... I guess all the YouTube videos and articles I linked are all spreading misinfo then.

You've finally hit on it! Yes, all those videos and articles that say that the slower SSD is a problem are wrong and are spreading misinfo.

Yes, the single-chip SSD's are slower doing sequential I/O. No, it doesn't matter to the vast majority (note I do not say all) of cases. Yes, it will matter if you regularly copy around multi-gigabyte files, or if you under-configured memory and regularly go deep into swap. No, the vast majority of users don't.

Just to repeat my personal experience: my primary computer has a 10x spread in sequential SSD speeds, from 500 MB/s SATA to a 6000+ MB/s 980 Pro. Subjectively, there is no difference ... zero ... regardless of which drive I am using, unless I run a very storage intensive test or benchmark, and then over an hour or so the fast drive comes out several minutes ahead. That's how irrelevant sequential speeds are for ordinary users.

 

[Zest28]

Wow, so nowadays >1400 3000 MB/s Read & Write speeds are 'horrible' and everyone is recommended to pay the hefty upcharge without actually knowing the hypothetical benefit for the individual buyer?
It may not be misinformation per definition, but…

Yes, it’s straight up garbage.

$150 2TB SSD’s do 7000MB/s. 1400MB/s is just bad.

There is no reasons for SSD’s to be this slow in 2023 on premium laptops.

 

[Zest28]

You've finally hit on it! Yes, all those videos and articles that say that the slower SSD is a problem are wrong and are spreading misinfo.

Yes, the single-chip SSD's are slower doing sequential I/O. No, it doesn't matter to the vast majority (note I do not say all) of cases. Yes, it will matter if you regularly copy around multi-gigabyte files, or if you under-configured memory and regularly go deep into swap. No, the vast majority of users don't.

Just to repeat my personal experience: my primary computer has a 10x spread in sequential SSD speeds, from 500 MB/s SATA to a 6000+ MB/s 980 Pro. Subjectively, there is no difference ... zero ... regardless of which drive I am using, unless I run a very storage intensive test or benchmark, and then over an hour or so the fast drive comes out several minutes ahead. That's how irrelevant sequential speeds are for ordinary users.

Man, you are the one that is spreading misinformation.

A 1400 MB/s SSD is not as fast as a 7000MB/s SSD. You can’t argue against facts.