Nah, people who want to use a laptop like that would be minimum 512 and 16 GB of ram, but - still faster than a Dell
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.
In your opinion is the slower SSD controversy in the base M2 Air overblown?
- Thread starter Jacoblee23
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Why would anyone who copies large files get a 256gb in the first place? Why would anyone who wants to do heavy multi tasking get an 8gb ram model? Once you conclude the logic of those two scenarios, you really have a tiny audience of people who would get the base model and actually notice a speed difference.
That is the point well made in some articles as well. Even a thermal throttling whine by some hero. “It throttles doing 8k rendering”. 1). You can do that on a MBA - awesome, 2) who would buy that laptop who did 8k rendering? 3) NS
It's also not the "use case" of any normal human who is the target market for the MBA
I mean, if you export 50 photos at once, or if you keep 25 active tabs open while doing video rendering. In all normal cases the m2 MBA will beat the m1 MBA. As it should be.
Imagine how dead and boring this MacBook Air section of this forum would be if apple had not downgraded the 256gb ssd? lol
Its honestly the biggest debate and biggest hang up about an otherwise fantastic laptop. And the sad truth to all of it is it won't even affect 99% of buyers for the base m2 anyways. While great to have on the m1 air, almost nobody was even taking advantage of that speed as its so scenario specific to begin with. That's why in almost every other scenario, the m2 is FASTER lol.
My Lenovo slim 7 pro x had a pci-e gen 4 ssd with double the speeds of my m2 air and my m2 air ran circles around that thing. Once you're above 1000-1500 read and write speeds, things like cpu and ram speed play a much bigger role in the main performance you're going to actually feel.
Its honestly the biggest debate and biggest hang up about an otherwise fantastic laptop. And the sad truth to all of it is it won't even affect 99% of buyers for the base m2 anyways. While great to have on the m1 air, almost nobody was even taking advantage of that speed as its so scenario specific to begin with. That's why in almost every other scenario, the m2 is FASTER lol.
My Lenovo slim 7 pro x had a pci-e gen 4 ssd with double the speeds of my m2 air and my m2 air ran circles around that thing. Once you're above 1000-1500 read and write speeds, things like cpu and ram speed play a much bigger role in the main performance you're going to actually feel.
MaxTech is a clown show. Can we please stop citing them like they’re an authoritative source?
I'll explain how you lost, then.
You accept that no Mac laptop has been slow in years, especially since Apple Silicon.
It isn't a scandal or a problem unless the actual people buying the actual laptop are inconvenienced or notice. They haven't been.
I fully expect it's selling in amazing numbers, and in a few months we will not discover there has been a backlash where they are not.
Unless there's something concrete and tangible for actual users of a base model MBA to complain about, there isn't an actual problem happening.
In the meantime, you and everyone are free to NOT BUY the base model MBA, which most people on these forums wouldn't anyway...because if you are interested enough to be here, you are not the target audience.
game. set. match. thanks for playing.
How could you possibly know this to be a fact? Sorry but this sounds like misguided conjecture to me.
Well, where is the floods of reports from all these base owners complaining about the performance and returning them? I must have missed those articles
An argument based on an ad homimen attack is not something that is persuasive. He ran the benchmarks, which speak for themselves.
This is called argumentum ad ignorantiam and it is a well known logical fallacy.
the fact you keep side stepping the actual question is good enough for me, have a good one
None of what you wrote has anything to do with the fact that the new model is 30% slower in some tasks vs the previous generation. By your reasoning any significant regression in performance is a non-issue provided the computer is still considered fast.
here's the poll i'd like to see (if people were entirely honest; so, no, am not expecting that):
A. i OWN the 256GB SSD M2 air and am extremely happy with it's performance.
B. i OWN the 256GB SSD M2 air and am extremely unhappy with it's performance.
C. i DON'T own the 256GB SSD M2 air, but i am compelled to tell people who chose option A why they are in fact wrong, and why they are actually suffering.
D. i DON'T own the 256GB SSD M2 air, so will NOT make any 'absolute' statements about it's performance; at least, not until i actually own one.
(and yes, i did say i was leaving this thread. am just astonished to return and see how much more ridiculous it's gotten)
A. i OWN the 256GB SSD M2 air and am extremely happy with it's performance.
B. i OWN the 256GB SSD M2 air and am extremely unhappy with it's performance.
C. i DON'T own the 256GB SSD M2 air, but i am compelled to tell people who chose option A why they are in fact wrong, and why they are actually suffering.
D. i DON'T own the 256GB SSD M2 air, so will NOT make any 'absolute' statements about it's performance; at least, not until i actually own one.
(and yes, i did say i was leaving this thread. am just astonished to return and see how much more ridiculous it's gotten)
Give it 10 more minutes, should get worse lol
It's a shame he didn't let them though. Instead he kept talking and just about everything he said was wrong.
Is that's what you meant by "math" being better than people's personal experiences?
I have not side stepped any question. I have done exactly the opposite. But anyway, enjoy your day.
The video I saw was a different. Max Tech did run the benchmarks in the video I saw. I do not cite him as an authority on the subject but mostly because he actually ran the benchmarks and did the testing -- all on the video. As for the "math" comment, yes, I was referring to the slow SSD speeds and the measurably diminished benchmark performance.
Apple has always charged a premium price for a premium product. In my opinion, they made a cost cutting decision at the cost of performance with an increase in price to the previous model. This is something I could see Dell or HP doing in a $499 notebook but it’s a little disappointing coming from Apple.
as you said, in your opinion (since we don't know actually apple's thinking on this). we can speculate all we want (or as some forum members seem to think, "state an opinion that should be accepted as fact")....
“None of what you wrote has anything to do with the fact…blah blah snip”
Your argument has been asked and answered, repeatedly. You’re just being argumentative bc you think you’ll ‘win’.
“By your reasoning any significant regression in performance is a non-issue provided the computer is still considered fast.”
No, it would be contextual w/r/t how much of a regression, when does it show itself, and who is the intended audience. But nice try.
We’re done here.
Your argument has been asked and answered, repeatedly. You’re just being argumentative bc you think you’ll ‘win’.
“By your reasoning any significant regression in performance is a non-issue provided the computer is still considered fast.”
No, it would be contextual w/r/t how much of a regression, when does it show itself, and who is the intended audience. But nice try.
We’re done here.
“How could you possibly know this to be a fact? Sorry but this sounds like misguided conjecture to me.”
It’s not hard to know what the target use cases are for the lowest end, lightest new laptop. You can pretend it’s ‘conjecture’, but that’s pretty transparently a dodge.
It’s not hard to know what the target use cases are for the lowest end, lightest new laptop. You can pretend it’s ‘conjecture’, but that’s pretty transparently a dodge.