Deliberately so, because I don't need to push performance boundaries to demonstrate the math of "it doesn't matter".
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
Deliberately so, because I don't need to push performance boundaries to demonstrate the math of "it doesn't matter".
Agree to a point but that's because I think the base spec should be 2x 256 GB chips for a total of 512. They did this to get closer to the previous model in cost.
I understand WHY they did it, but imho 256 GB on a machine of this price range is a mistake no matter how fast it is.
why? lots of people (including myself) don't store large files on our macbooks anymore, and lots & lots of people now stream things that used to eat up a lot of space; ie movies, music.
if apple needs the 256 to have an 'entry level model' at that cost, so be it. i can buy it or not (i did, btw)...
You're not comparing Apples to Apples (sorry, I couldn't resist!). The "controversy" is about a two-year-old M1 MBA 256 SSD performing better than a shiny brand new, more expensive M2 MBA with a 256 SSD. Both are great laptops, but still disappointing that Apple skimped on the base M2.
Last edited:
Because in terms of impact to the total BOM cost, it cripples the machine much more than beneficial for the money it saves - in my opinion. If all you're doing is streaming then save the money and buy a base model iPad.
If you know you're an edge case... you do you. If you're an end user and unsure, I'd advise 512 as a minimum sensible storage amount - if you're not certain your workload fits inside 256.
But in my opinion, spending the money required for a MacBook Air and then crippling it with 256 GB of storage is just hurting yourself down the road and compromising the machine more than you should at this level of expense.
Last edited:
I am really wondering which storage capacity is Apple’s bestseller — and if I were to place a bet, I’d say it’s 256GB. How many non-professionals are there who need more than 256GB? And what for? It’s probably a drop in the bucket. And it’s 256 GB is really only “crippling” if you have many files, and no iCloud, or similar.
I've got 215 GB of applications installed. Even with no data I'm at 80% plus of the total storage of a 256 GB machine. Running a machine continually beyond 80% capacity is bad in terms of filesystem fragmentation (which is still a thing even if it isn't so bad for performance on SSD) and far worse for wear rate.
Again, know your usage, but I wouldn't even say that my application collection is particularly extensive. A couple of games, the affinity suite, some network admin tools, office, iWork.. not what I'd call a huge application library.
Put another way - going from 256 to 512 (hypothetically) would give ~ 300 GB of usable space for data, instead of ~ 40-50 GB. i.e., 7x the usable space, once apps are installed - for a marginal increase in cost vs. the total cost of the machine.
Plus I'd be putting a lot less wear and tear on the SSD due to it thrashing the crap out of the last 20% of its NAND for my working data. I'd get more space for time machine local backups, space to back up my iPhone or iPad, space to transfer some data from home to work without screwing around with USB drives, etc.
Again, know your workload, etc. - but if you can swing it, the difference in capability between a 256 GB machine and a 512 GB machine is FAR beyond what you might think based on paper spec without thinking it through in a bit more detail.
Last edited:
Youtube reviewers need to stop it already. 10 video for the MBA. Now its 1 month later... "I was wrong" "took my mba m2 to the beach" "took it on a flight" "best mba ever" yada yada yada. This laptop was awesome from the beginning make no mistake about it. Now on to the next iPhones....looking at you 14PM 👀
It's worth considering that it made the base model M2 worse in certain power-user tasks than the base M1. Objectively it's a regression and I don't like that.
But it should be noted that people who do those kinds of tasks probably won't go for the base model anyway and then the point is moot. Either going 16GB RAM or 512GB storage "fixes" the swap concerns.
That transfer speeds during file management are lower I feel is a far lesser problem. You'll have 256GB storage, you won't be moving much data anyway.
Maybe it will show itself to be a problem for more casual use cases five macOS versions later, though.
But it should be noted that people who do those kinds of tasks probably won't go for the base model anyway and then the point is moot. Either going 16GB RAM or 512GB storage "fixes" the swap concerns.
That transfer speeds during file management are lower I feel is a far lesser problem. You'll have 256GB storage, you won't be moving much data anyway.
Maybe it will show itself to be a problem for more casual use cases five macOS versions later, though.
I tried a M2 MBA in a store, base configuration. For pretty basic tasks like web browsing it really feels fast. In my experience, never the web felt as "light" as with this machine. I checked Activity Monitor too; it takes very little system resources for such tasks, so it is very efficient.
I will buy one for work but then I will go for the 8 core GPU, 24 GB RAM and 1 TB storage. In my case the number of CPU cores is more than sufficient since I will use it to run non-parallelised models, 8 GPU cores is just fine, but then I need as much memory and storage as I can get.
People tend to say that if you need so much memory and storage then better get the Pro model (M1-based now). Well, the M2 core is faster than the M1 core and in my case the code is not parallel, so the M2 Air will be better than any Pro model if it has enough memory. Unless Apple releases in the meantime M2-based Pro models.
Computers cost money. This is a fact.
The base model M2 Air costs more money than the base model M1 Air. Also a fact.
I'm not saying that everyone NEEDS fast SSD speeds. But why would I buy a more expensive computer when the less expensive computer outperforms it? Because there's a new design? You could make a case for the 1080p webcam upgrade and MAYBE the return of MagSafe, but that's about all I'd buy. Otherwise, why on earth would I spend more money for a worse performing system?
...so long as you don't buy it with 256GB of SSD.
I'm sorry, but "design language" is a superficial feature when I'm spending a four-digit figure on a device. I care about performance. I care about value. The CPU and GPU speed bumps are incremental, and with a slow SSD bottlenecking that, it's negligable. Again, upgraded webcam, you could make a strong case for. But literally every reviewer out there (not just MaxTech, but Wired, Macworld, and a whole host of others) are calling out this 256GB drive. I'm not saying that it won't be fine for some people. Some people ONLY care about form and don't care about differences in function (however minimal). I'm saying that, for my money, I'd better be getting as good of a bang for buck value when it comes to system performance and it's not as good of a deal in that arena to get a base model M2 Air as it is a base model M1.
Given the starting price of the machine, I don’t like it, but I don’t feel like it is a major technical problem. Any modern SSD drive is fast enough for snappy basic day-to-day usage, and if you wanted to use it for more than that, you wouldn’t be buying the base model anyway.
Probably should have opted for 512, but not always such a simple a choice. I only install what I know works and is of benefit. The options are out there and if a working machine who cares of the cost.
I live between MacOS & Windows so all data barring the working set is on external drives. So I don't need large internal storage. I just prefer to simplify I don't want multiple versions of the sane barring backups.
Very much agree "know your workload" pick what what works for you and don't overfeed Apple LOL. The base models are very capable systems. In this case the base M2 may or may not be a reduction in performance versus my 13" M1 MBP, equally I don't think that's something I feel the need to roll the dice on...
Q-6
Last edited:
Your definition of “outperforms” is very superficial and misleading. It is just false to say the M1 outperforms the M2. It does not. There is no evidence it does. Not in single core, not in multi core. Not in video rendering. Nowhere. It is not a “worse performing system”. I’m wondering whether you’ve ever used the base model M2.
Also, with all due respect, what exactly “you’d buy” does not say anything about what other people would buy, or think is worth the cash. I must say, I’m a little surprised you focus on me mentioning the design language, but you ignore the other advantages I mentioned: better GPU, better CPU, for instance.
The only point you can reasonably make a case for in which the M2 is “worse” is possible the SSD, I agree with you on the fact that this is basis for a debate. But I strongly disagree with you that this makes the M2 the “worse performing system” (whatever that means, by the way — performing in what way?)
The conclusion that you’ll have a limping system because the SSD is the bottleneck is the stuff of fantasy movies. There is no evidence that this will actually be an issue, not only for light, but even for basic users.
As for “bang for your buck”, I agree that for some (perhaps many) the M1 is the better “deal”. But as the overall package goes, the M2 is the more modern and, yes, capable device.
I opted for 1 TB pro (formerly 1 TB air) for the reasons I list above, I was speaking hypothetically with an example of not a huge number of apps taking 80% of a 256 GB model.
Noted & explained. I don't keep a lot of data on the notebooks as frequently switch between macOS & Windows. Mostly core app's and documents so in my case less is more.
Q-6
It may be false to compare the SoCs in a vacuum and come to that result, however, there are plenty of people out there, taking a base model M1 Air, pitting it against a base model M2 Air, and finding that the slower SSD bogs down the system.
I've used both Macs. Have you? And, we're not talking about single-core benchmarks, nor multi-core, nor rendering. We're talking about an inferior performing disk causing the overall system performance to make one model of Mac appear or feel slower than its predecessor. I'm wondering whether or not you know how boot disk performance affects the overall feel of a system.
Clearly not! Clearly there are not only people out there buying this entry level model, but defending it like it was their personal religion!
Alright, someone clearly either forgot his A+ certification knowledge or really doesn't know much about computers. Let me break this down for you. Slow performing drives are bottlenecks. Your CPU and GPU could be the best out there and a slow performing drive wouldn't have you feeling any of those advantages. So, go on and on about how much better the M2's CPU or GPU are over the M1's. If the drive in your given M2 Mac is a piece of crap, then an M1 Mac with the inferior CPU and GPU will outperform it (as has been the case in pretty much every publication reviewing the base model of either M2 Mac).
Again, learn up on how a computer works rather than comparing me Apple tech spec sheets. A slower drive is still a bottleneck. If you knew how a boot drive worked, then I wouldn't have to explain how drastically reduced I/O speeds to disk are going to cause a noticeable performance difference.
(And to your "performing in what way" question, OVERALL SYSTEM PERFORMANCE. Go grab a computer unfortunate enough to still use a spinning hard disk drive, swap it with an SSD, and tell me that you don't notice a world of difference in performance. I dare ya.)
Fantasy movies? What are you even talking about?
It's only an issue for anyone buying a base model M2 Air hoping that it will perform better than its predecessor. Those that don't care won't care and those that don't know enough about how this stuff works, won't and it'll either be fine for them or won't be. Frankly, I wouldn't waste my hard-earned money on any 256GB equipped M2 Mac at this point.
What is it that makes an M2 Air a more "capable" device other than maybe a better webcam? What makes it more "modern" other than that it uses a stupid design from a year ago rather than a different stupid design from four years ago? Or are you just regurgitating Apple marketing nonsense?
It IS a superficial feature. Also some people buy computers because they're FUNCTIONAL. If you're saying that's not the reason why people buy Macs, I'm beginning to get the sense that, for at least everyone defending the M2 Air like it's their religion, you're probably not wrong.
No I'm just not using my MBA for these tasks at all. Its my day to day computer I have a far more powerful desktop mac for my "Pro Tasks". I also have 1tb of storage on my MBA so it negated the SSD issue regardless.
There’s a lot of patronising stuff in here — I don’t think that’s particularly kind of you. Be better.
As for the content of your message — there’s a lot of points you’re making that I don’t disagree with. Of course, the SSD can be a bottleneck. Yes, I have owned and used spinning drives — of course they are slower. But are you trying to imply that the M2 256GB harddrive is as slow as an HDD? Or that the distinction in “system performance” between 256GB and 512GB M2 is as noticeable as between an SSD and an HDD? Because, if you are, then I don’t know what to say to you.
Finally, you’re claiming “there are plenty of people out there…” Well, there are also plenty of people out there pitting the M2 base against the M2 24GB 1TB, and coming to the conclusion it takes quite a bit of a battering to get to the point where the M2 base is noticeably slower. This one for example:
If you don’t want to talk about benchmarks for CPU or GPU, or about rendering performance, then what you’re really asking is how snappy does the machine feel. If you’re already convinced the M2 base is slower than the M1 base, I’m not surprised you find it easy to gather evidence for that fact. I didn’t feel that way after using both at all.
Finally, I do think you’re being disingenuous calling the only upside of the M2 the “better webcam” or the “stupid design from a year ago instead of the stupid design from four years ago”. From the way you speak about this machine, I wonder whether all the religion to attribute to me for defending this machine is actually as appropriately attributed to you.