Simply optimization of the OS for accessing the different storage config. This is about storage, not RAM btw.
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.
M2 13-Inch MacBook Pro With 256GB SSD Appears Slower Than Equivalent M1 in Real-World Speed Tests
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Anyone who cares about performance should not be buying a 8-GB/256-GB MacBook Pro....I doubt that many who care about performance are....
Now I'd want to see other RAM - SSD Combos before buying anything.
Which combos of the M2 Air will get the best performance?? I'm looking at a 16GB- 1TB model.
His thermal performance tests were telling as well. Apple is running the M2 MBP hot and it throttles sooner than the M1 version. That won't bode well for the M2 Air with no fans in high processing situations... like 50 Google Chrome tabs open with video ads running.
Which combos of the M2 Air will get the best performance?? I'm looking at a 16GB- 1TB model.
His thermal performance tests were telling as well. Apple is running the M2 MBP hot and it throttles sooner than the M1 version. That won't bode well for the M2 Air with no fans in high processing situations... like 50 Google Chrome tabs open with video ads running.
Probably Timmy himself. He has no understand on technology and branding and is mostly concerned with costs.
Caveat emptor
If one is about to spend over 1000 dollars, its on the buyer to do some due diligence here. The point is read the fine print. Caveat emptor
Sheep don't need tech info. Apple, only wants sheep. Case closed.
Anyone who doesn't care about performance would probably stick with their X-year old computer, for that matter.
It's even being marketed with "Pro" in its name, if you didn't notice.
I have no idea what Facebook has to do with my reply, nor does using Boot Camp to run Windows have anything to do with your post, which mentioned how speedy a Windows clean install into a Lenovo laptop was vs doing a Mac OS clean install.
If what you're trying to say is that there are programs that only work on Windows machines, that's not news to anyone. What I said was that I was glad I didn't need to use Windows at all any more, and that for me using Windows is the real performance slowdown, and not SSD speeds.
All the result of no cohesive strategy, which is the role of the CEO. There is no more, "let's do it right" because it is the right thing for our customers at Apple any more.
Correct.
Apple raised the base price of the M2 MacBook Air by $200. Some of that covers the new components and the R&D work, but some of it might also cover the cost of using 2x128GB modules if the decision to use 1x256GB module on the M2 13" MacBook Pro was to keep the base price at $1299.
As to whether or not Apple is supply-constrained on 128GB modules, the base M1 MacBook Air, M1 Mac mini and 24" iMac all use 2x128GB modules for storage and all are available for immediate delivery. So I think Apple has enough stock of these chips.
So that could lend credence to the decision to go 1x256GB on the M2 13" MacBook Pro was to lower the Bill of Materials cost to maintain the $1299 price point rather than raise the base price to $1399 and continue with 2x128GB modules.
Since the M2 MacBook Air saw a $200 price hike, this could mean that Apple would continue with 2x128GB modules for that product.
So that could lend credence to the decision to go 1x256GB on the M2 13" MacBook Pro was to lower the Bill of Materials cost to maintain the $1299 price point rather than raise the base price to $1399 and continue with 2x128GB modules.
Since the M2 MacBook Air saw a $200 price hike, this could mean that Apple would continue with 2x128GB modules for that product.
Can someone explain why is this an issue in real life scenario? What do people use it for where read speeds are top priority regardless of storage size and this difference will matter? Why not get an M1 MBP then? It is cheaper and has faster read speeds!
Hell, for the money you could even pick up a 512 from Apple Refurb!
Hell, for the money you could even pick up a 512 from Apple Refurb!
We are seeing some truly creative excuses being made to defend Apple in here.
This is creativity in action!
This is creativity in action!
This is my #1 gripe with modern Apple (bold emphasis mine)
The bean counting supply guy CEO, taken to the extreme, has landed us here -- and it sucks.
It’s not an issue in real life. Anyone looking for the type of difference in performance that this change actually demonstrates, are not going to buy the base spec MBP other than for a portable compliment to a desktop system. if they are buying this machine for serious usage, they will either get more than 256gb, or they will have some kind of raid or external device they're using.
If none of that applies and they’re simply buying it to cut costs, well then touché, because that’s why Apple are selling it, to cut costs - as you’re all bemoaning. Though why you think it’s unusual for a company to want to cut costs, whilst on the other hand knowing that it’s normal for a consumer to want to cut costs is beyond me.
Whatever, the post I responded to with this basically said that you are stupid if you do mission critical tasks with 256GB of storage. Many users will be unaware of this speed disparity but somehow, it is their fault if they want to do intensive tasks?
Actually I quoted what he wrote for you above, as you seem to be misinterpreting it. He never said anyone was stupid. He merely pointed out that buying this machine at this spec for these tasks (as in the video) would be unusual.
I’ll add that if one was doing that, in order to cut costs then they would be aware of the issue and be alright with it.
Anyone who falls through these gaps is extremely unlikely to notice the differences unless using two machines side by side - as they would only be exporting or heavily using the pro level apps rarely.
i cant believe u thinking only apple has supply chain issues. Literally almost every IT Company in the world suffers currently big shortage of chips
Apple can spin this as ransomware and hacking protection. It will take slightly longer for malware to encrypt, infect, or transfer your files so that your security software can react with less damage done.
And then many people on here will be like "Apple has spoken. That settles it. I trust Apple. Some people will complain no matter what. What? The people here aren't even engineers."
And then many people on here will be like "Apple has spoken. That settles it. I trust Apple. Some people will complain no matter what. What? The people here aren't even engineers."
What does the pro moniker mean?
It’s a line of machines. Lines of machines have to start somewhere.
They’re called the base models and normally they’re merely an entryway in to a faster or higher range or different style computing range.
The starting place of the pro line of macbooks, in this case.
It’s like professional anything, no pros actually buy anything but the top one or two tiers of the products.
I’m a photographer and I shoot canon. This is what I do for a living and in my particular segment of my field, No pros buy anything other than 1 or 5 series bodies. They don’t.
There are other things marketed as pro, and that’s great. They work. But in reality if you’re a professional you need the top features, which are always (yep. It’s not just Apple) limited to the highest end.
I’ll say it again. Anyone who will notice such a ridiculously tiny difference in ssd speed is not buying this base model as their main machine. If they are - they’re looking to cut costs (as is Apple) and understand the limitations of buying something perhaps less suitable to their needs.
Better him than iJustine or Rene Ritchie, I say... while Max Tech does use clickbait titles, at least his videos do have information and do criticize Apple when needed, unlike with the above-mentioned two Apple apologists.
The whole point of selling a "Pro" machine is having it start ABOVE the baseline.
Here, you have a "Pro" product with worse performance compared to the "Air" (=baseline) product released 18 months earlier.
That's unexcusable.
I don't know anything about professional cameras, but I'd expect an entry-level professional camera to still perform way better than an high-end point and shoot.
Just accept that some products by Apple are less focused than others. M1 Airs and M1 Pro/Max Pros are well-rounded machines for their targets. The M2s seem to be missing their mark thus far.
It doesn’t have worse performance. It has slightly lower ssd speeds, measured whilst performing high bandwidth tasks in high end software.
It’s not a valid comparison, even whilst it is, to a point, true.
Btw. Air doesn’t mean baseline. The air range has a baseline product and a top end product just like the mbp.
It does have worse real world performance. This whole article is about this issue.
SSD speed is a core component of system performance. For the last 2 years, people have been buying Macs with only 8GB RAM because swapping to the SSD was so fast that you could hardly tell.
Now they've added a bottleneck to force upgrades towards either larger RAM or SSD sizes.
But I'd expect no less from the company selling iMacs with 5400rpm drives all the way until 2021.