The millions of people that buy MacBooks disagree. ! The people that want to use a machine without being plugged in buy MacBooks.
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.
First Benchmark Results Surface for M3 Chip in New Macs
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
The millions of people that buy MacBooks disagree. ! The people that want to use a machine without being plugged in buy MacBooks.
should M2 mbp users feel the need to have something that convinces them to upgrade?
should m2 any device users want to have something that makes them want to upgrade? it’s the last gen chip.
people keep wanting leaps year to year, and i cannot understand why.
I am glad Apple is full steam ahead aboard the 3 nanometer express, but in my view, just like Apple skipped M2 in the iMac, perhaps it should have skipped M2 max in the Mac Studio and waited to release it with M3 max.
On iPhone there is a 1 year cadence. Here, the main issue I have is the short time frame between the M2 Max studio announcement and the m3 max release. Only 4.5 months, and the mac studio is not upgradable, and you can't add the m3 max / ultra logic board to the existing chassis (unlike Framework).
Because they don't understand how much work it is to get even 5% more out of the silicon.
Framework has a unique and intriguing business model. Good on them. Question is can/will they continue to do this if they were selling a few million units a year.
Just fine, as expected. I am most interested in seeing how the evolving architecture with OS/apps takes advantage of UMA RAM, etc. over the next year or so.
The first benchmark results for the standard M3 chip surfaced in the Geekbench 6 database today, providing a closer look at the chip's CPU performance improvements.
Based on the results so far, the M3 chip has single-core and multi-core scores of around 3,000 and 11,700, respectively. The standard M2 chip has single-core and multi-core scores of around 2,600 and 9,700, respectively, so the M3 chip is up to 20% faster than the M2 chip, as Apple claimed during its "Scary Fast" event on Monday.
Geekbench 6 multi-core scores:
It's unclear if the results are for the new 14-inch MacBook Pro or iMac, both of which are available with the standard M3 chip, but performance should be similar for both machines. The results have a "Mac15,3" identifier, which Bloomberg's Mark Gurman previously reported was for a laptop with the same display resolution as a 14-inch MacBook Pro.
- M3 chip: ~11,700 (+20% vs. M2 chip)
- M2 chip: ~9,700 (+17% vs. M1 chip)
- M1 chip: ~8,315
The standard M3 chip is equipped with an 8-core CPU and up to a 10-core GPU, and it supports up to 24GB of unified memory. The chip has improved GPU architecture with support for hardware-accelerated ray tracing and mesh shading, which will make high-end games look more realistic. It also has a 16-core Neural Engine for AI.
We have yet to see any Geekbench results for the higher-end M3 Pro and M3 Max chips available in most new 14-inch and 16-inch MacBook Pro models.
Article Link: First Benchmark Results Surface for M3 Chip in New Macs
Last edited:
Apple is mostly a mobile device company that happens to make desktops.
It is easy to estimate this.
- look at Apple's "Activity Monitor" while doing what you normally do with your Mac. Look at the average CPU utilization. Let's say it sits at 10%.
- Look at the increase in speed of the new CPU. Let's say this is 20%
- Multiply the two together to see the real-world speedup. In this case, it would be about 2%.
It gets worse. Some things can not be sped up. For example, I am right now writing a design document for a software project. A faster CPU will not allow me to write faster. In general, most tasks we do can't be sped up because the speed is limited by the user.
Anxiously awaiting the M3 MBA. Seeing as the M1 MBA I use now is my favorite Apple computer ever, I am beyond excited to see M3 come to the MBA lineup and potentially make the jump!
Aiming for the 15" this time around with 16GB RAM and 512 SSD, a solid replacement for my M1 MBA of similar specs ☺️
Aiming for the 15" this time around with 16GB RAM and 512 SSD, a solid replacement for my M1 MBA of similar specs ☺️
Huge upgrade in speed, so glad I've already ordered my 14" M3 😁
The first benchmark results for the standard M3 chip surfaced in the Geekbench 6 database today, providing a closer look at the chip's CPU performance improvements.
Based on the results so far, the M3 chip has single-core and multi-core scores of around 3,000 and 11,700, respectively. The standard M2 chip has single-core and multi-core scores of around 2,600 and 9,700, respectively, so the M3 chip is up to 20% faster than the M2 chip, as Apple claimed during its "Scary Fast" event on Monday.
Geekbench 6 multi-core scores:
It's unclear if the results are for the new 14-inch MacBook Pro or iMac, both of which are available with the standard M3 chip, but performance should be similar for both machines. The results have a "Mac15,3" identifier, which Bloomberg's Mark Gurman previously reported was for a laptop with the same display resolution as a 14-inch MacBook Pro.
- M3 chip: ~11,700 (+20% vs. M2 chip)
- M2 chip: ~9,700 (+17% vs. M1 chip)
- M1 chip: ~8,315
The standard M3 chip is equipped with an 8-core CPU and up to a 10-core GPU, and it supports up to 24GB of unified memory. The chip has improved GPU architecture with support for hardware-accelerated ray tracing and mesh shading, which will make high-end games look more realistic. It also has a 16-core Neural Engine for AI.
We have yet to see any Geekbench results for the higher-end M3 Pro and M3 Max chips available in most new 14-inch and 16-inch MacBook Pro models.
Article Link: First Benchmark Results Surface for M3 Chip in New Macs
What do you mean by "real computer work"? Just want to understand for myself in which scenarios I don't get enough speed on my iMac Pro and MBP i7.
Honestly - makes the iMac look like a nice upgrade for those that like the form factor. Meaningful boosts over the M1 iMac, and an opportunity to make sure you get your RAM/Storage right for the next few years...
Ah. So same complaints as the previous 500 posts, with nothing new to add. Got it, thanks.
Of course. Almost all upgrades will be from M1 and previous (duh). This a good solid update showing that v1 of the new ~3 nm process actually works (quite a feat really). Bravo!
Huh, I was expecting more of a jump considering all the noise people have been making about how much better 3nm was going to be.
By the looks of it, the base M3 is faster than the base M1 Pro model, and about just as fast as the M2 Pro base model in multicore. That's impressive.
I suppose the question then is why did they update the Mac Studio in June if these new chips were just around the corner. Unless there was uncertainty and releasing these MBPs now was a last minute decision?
I agree it shouldn't have the Pro moniker. Maybe Apple should have just called it the 14" Macbook.
I am talking about processor performance
MacBookPro18,2 - Geekbench
Benchmark results for a MacBookPro18,2 with an Apple M1 Max processor.
browser.geekbench.com
Scores for my MacBook Pro 18,2 - Apple M1 Max
1781 - single
12800 - multi
The TDP of the CPU in the 2017 12-inch MacBook is the same 4.5W as the A17 Pro, so from a thermal standpoint Apple could very much build the same computer with an iPhone chip, and presumably that's what they'd use if the goal were really to reproduce that preposterously-thin design.
It's interesting from a CPU perspective that that computer was basically an iPhone, and also that a Mac running one of those CPUs would be quite capable (roughly comparable to something as recent as the final-generation i7 MacBook Air in 2020, although thanks to the huge single-core performance it would actually be much faster for a lot of real-world use).
I think(?) that Intel's current best 4.5W CPU is an underclocked i7-10510Y, which the A17 Pro has somewhat better multi-core performance than and is nearly 3x faster in single-core, so were Apple to build one it would presumably be the fastest... microbook? Whatever that class of laptop is called.
All that said, it seems pretty clear that Apple's current stance is that if you want an ultra-light laptop, you should get an iPad with a keyboard case.
Little to rave about? Sure it's unusual for Apple to update to a new gen of chip so soon, but let's not forget they started with the Macbook Pros and acheived 22 hours of battery life + a 20% performance gain! So more battery life and a 20% gain. That's not going to thrill all users but you can't deny the value you're now getting at the same price point.
Last edited:
Odds are that real-world experience improvements will ultimately (as OS and apps adjust to available new hardware competence) be similar to or better than what benchmarks show, because of all the other improvements that Apple engineers do under the hood that we do not see.