MacBook Pro M3 on test: too modest a computer

The M3 Pro and M3 Max are excellent upgrades for the MacBook Pro. Depending on the configuration you choose, they turn the laptop into a self-sufficient gem or a rocket ship. One of the biggest advances is in energy efficiency, something Apple's marketing doesn't emphasise. Amazing!

In this test I'm sticking to the new chips and a few lines about the new colour. Apart from that, only the maximum brightness has changed, reaching 600 cd/m² compared to 500 previously. Full details of the screen, finishes, connections, keyboard and touchpad can be found here:

The design: an elegant but fragile "sidereal black"

The MacBook M3 Pro or M3 Max comes in classic silver or "sidereal black", a new colour. This replaces "Sidereal Grey", which is now only found on 14" models with a normal M3 chip. The new colour isn't actually black, but rather anthracite. I didn't like this dark grey in Apple's photos, but in person it's quite elegant.

Alas, it won't last. Apple claims that its new coating protects "black" laptops from fingerprints. That may be true compared to other devices, but the MacBook still quickly looks dirty. Grease marks can easily be wiped off with a microfibre cloth, but who wants to spend time doing that? The silver MacBook doesn't have the same problem: it stays clean, even with frequent use, which is more practical on a daily basis.

Performance: Pro for the persistent, Max for the insatiable

The M3 chips have more delineated target audiences than the previous generation. The M3 Pro drops down a notch and is closer to the normal M3, while the M3 Max is positioned higher up. This is also reflected in the number of transistors: 25 billion for the M3, 37 billion for the M3 Pro and 92 billion for the M3 Max. You can find out more about the architecture and what's behind the chips in this article:

Here are the specifications of the M3 compared to the M2 range:

I'm testing the new MacBook Pros with the full chip versions, but the base RAM:

• 14-inch with the M3 Pro, 12-core CPU, 18-core GPU, 18GB RAM, 512GB SSD
• 16 inches with the M3 Max, 16-core CPU, 40-core GPU, 48GB RAM, 1TB SSD

I won't go into too much detail about the power of the SSD. In two words, it's ultra-fast. From the version with 1TB of storage, the SSD offers write and read speeds in excess of 6000MB/s. For the 512GB version, this is about twice as fast, because it contains fewer modules that can process data in parallel. But even then, the SSD never gets into trouble on a day-to-day basis.

CPU: desktop power in a laptop

The CPU performance tests confirm what the technical data suggested: 3-nanometer manufacturing increases the performance of each core by around 13% compared with M2 chips. In terms of multi-core performance, the M3 Max easily outdistances the M3 Pro, since it has twice as many performance cores.

The M3 Max is almost 50% faster, compared to both the M2 Max and the M3 Pro. The latter is slightly faster than the M2 Pro, as it swaps two performance cores for two efficiency cores.

This new differentiated build makes perfect sense. The target group for the Pro chip probably didn't even need all the power offered by the M2 generation, so there's no point in adding more. Instead, Apple has chosen to move the cursor towards energy efficiency. This is paying off in terms of battery life, as we shall see.

The Max has other priorities: it's aimed at people who want maximum power. If you're one of them, the M3 Max is a dream upgrade. Its CPU comes close to Mac Studio's M2 Ultra in performance tests, with 12 performance cores and a larger cooling system. In Cinebench R23, it lags by 20%, and in Geekbench 6, the score is almost identical. The fact that a laptop comes so close to the fastest desktop Mac commands respect.

GPU: all that's missing are compatible games

The M3 Max's GPU is making less progress than the CPU. Apple has only added two extra cores to the chip compared to the M2 Max. The M3 Pro even has one fewer GPU core than the M2 Pro. But the 3-nanometer manufacturing ultimately makes up for the graphics performance of the smaller chip.

The M3 chips score very well in the new Cinebench R24 GPU test. The M3 Max and M3 Pro are rated twice as highly there as their predecessors. This is due to the fact that the new graphics processors support ray tracing and this performance test is particularly sensitive to it.

In the performance tests without ray tracing, performance is similar to that of the older generation. The M3 Max is superior overall, with its lead over the M2 Max averaging just over 15%. In some tests, the M3 Pro loses its duels with the M2 Pro, while in others it wins them. On average, it scores 3% higher.

The results show the extent to which graphics performance depends on the optimisation of the software concerned. The M3 chips support two important technologies for 3D rendering and video games: mesh shading and ray tracing. If only Apple would finally encourage more development studios to release their games on macOS...

Productivity: the M3 Max is a real rocket

In reality, it's mainly the creative professions that benefit from the MacBook Pro's power. For my video performance test, I'm exporting an 11-minute 4K project into DaVinci Resolve Studio editing software. The source material is a mix of 4K and 8K recordings in the very demanding H.265 codec. The project also includes various elaborate filters, titles and colour adjustments.

In Lightroom, I export 200 RAW photos with a resolution of 50 megapixels. For my second test, I retouch 10 photos with the AI-assisted noise filter.

In Lightroom, I export 200 RAW photos with a resolution of 50 megapixels.

The export of my test video is 1/5th faster with the M3 Max than with the old chip. This is in line with my expectations, as it's mainly the GPU that's under strain, but some filters benefit from the CPU's high computing power. Both laptops run clips smoothly during editing. The advantage of the M3 Max only becomes apparent when using complex filters and elaborate grading, where playback with the M3 Pro chip is sometimes jerky.

Exporting Lightroom takes less time with the two new chips compared to the old ones (+28% for the Max, +15% for the Pro). This task is mainly CPU and RAM intensive. The AI-assisted noise filter requires high graphics performance, and the M3 Pro is no faster than the old version. Despite this, photo editing runs smoothly.

Performance in the Speedometer 2.0 browser speed test increases by 30%. You'll hardly notice it on a day-to-day basis, these applications didn't present any difficulties for the previous chips either.

Temperature and cooling: more efficient than the previous generation

Both MacBook Pros are undaunted by everyday tasks, staying cool and totally silent. It's only when editing video or using calculation-intensive Lightroom filters that the fans eventually become audible, without being loud. If I overwhelm the devices with synthetic performance tests, the CPU reaches 103°C before the fans come on. Neither the 14" with the M3 Pro nor the 16" with the M3 Max need to slow down during the ten minutes of Cinebench. The CPU remains stable at 3.58 gigahertz (GHz).

If I run 3DMark's graphics performance test in parallel, the M3 Max's CPU slows to 2.5 GHz. However, maximum load at this level is unrealistic over the long term on a daily basis. In the small laptop, the cooling would be more stressed with the larger chip, as shown by tests on YouTube.

On the other hand, the M3 Pro poses no problems for the 14". The CPU clock frequency never dips below 3.1 GHz. This is much better than the previous M2 Pro, which had to slow down to 1.2 GHz. This clearly shows the benefit of the improved energy efficiency of the new 3 nanometre chips. But the other consequence is even more important.

Range: Apple's false modesty

The battery capacity has not changed: 70 watt-hours for the smaller model, 100 watt-hours for the larger. During the presentation of the new MacBook Pro, Apple didn't mention battery life. According to the website, it's 18 hours of video viewing for the 14" and 22 hours for the 16". It doesn't matter how Apple obtains these results. It's more interesting to note that they're identical to models equipped with the M2 Pro or M2 Max. So at first I didn't think the new laptops would last any longer than the old ones.

I'm delighted to reveal that I was wrong.

I measure battery life in two ways:

1. How long does the device last if I'm watching a YouTube video in 1440p via WiFi with average screen brightness? With that kind of demand, the SoC is pretty much idle. A big chip like the M3 Max consumes more energy than a small one, even without calling on its power.
2. How many percent of battery do I consume when I export my test video to DaVinci five times in a row? This second test measures the efficiency of the chips in carrying out an intense task. The M3 Pro doesn't particularly shine here. The M3 Max does have a higher power consumption, but over a shorter period of time as it exports video more quickly. If you don't have an outlet nearby, you'll have just as much battery left at the end of the task, regardless of the chip.

At the end of the tests, my world is turned upside down: Apple is being modest. Yes, Apple! The company whose marketing is all about superlatives and converting every technical advance into hard cash.

At the end of the tests, my world is turned upside down: Apple is all about modesty.

In the YouTube endurance test, the 14" MacBook Pro M3 Pro lasts 25 hours, 25% longer than with the M2 Pro. The 3 nanometre chip is a jewel of efficiency. Remember: performance remains virtually identical. And it's not as if the old Pro chip was mediocre.

I don't have a 16" with the M3 Pro to hand, but I can get an idea of its battery life from the M2 generation. The larger laptop lasts 40% longer than the smaller one while watching YouTube. A MacBook Pro M3 Pro 16'' would therefore have to pass the 35-hour mark, which borders on the absurd! The M3 Max drains its battery 10 hours earlier, keeping up with the M2 Max. That's impressive too, given the extra power reserves of the new chip.

The superior power to energy consumption ratio of 3 nanometre chips is proving to be under pressure. The M3 Pro consumes 24% less energy than the M2 Pro for five video exports. The M3 Max outperforms the M2 Max by around 18%. So if you don't spend your days watching YouTube, the battery will last longer than with the previous model, even if you choose the larger chip.

Verdict: it's a no-brainer

The MacBook Pro isn't Apple's sexiest product, but it may well be the best. No other laptop comes close. I know hardcore Windows fans who are considering switching (through gritted teeth) just for that combo of finish, power and battery life. It's certainly not over: Apple continues to widen the gap with the competition with its M3 chips.

The M3 Max brings power hitherto reserved for desktop Macs to a mobile device. Both the CPU and GPU are significantly faster than the previous chip. That's great news for anyone who has to edit videos or needs huge reserves of power. The graphics processor handles ray tracing and mesh shading. All we're waiting for now are games for the Mac!

Among these new SoCs, the M3 Pro is, in my opinion, an unsung star. It's rated poorly in some tests for being only slightly faster than the M2 Pro. But this view overlooks the essential point: the M3 Pro was not designed to offer extra performance, but to be more efficient. It offers 25% more battery life than its predecessor. Most users will never use its full power. I don't understand why Apple isn't touting this progress more.

The main problem with the new Mac chips is the old Mac chips. If your device is from one of the last two generations, the upgrade isn't that worthwhile. But if you've got a Windows or Intel MacBook, I highly recommend an M3 chip. The extra cost is justified.

The right configuration is a personal matter. The M3 Pro will suit most applications. It offers a good balance between adequate performance and exceptional battery life, even on the 14". If you want more power, opt for the M3 Max, ideally in the 16" with superior cooling. And what about the colour? Even if the 'sidereal black' colour is new and refined, I wouldn't touch it (it would leave greasy marks). The silver colour is timeless and less delicate. In this colour, the new MacBook Pro laptop is a no-brainer.

Headline photo: Samuel Buchmann