Apple M3 SoC analyzed: Increased performance and improved efficiency
Last week, Apple presented the new M3 SoCs (M3, M3 Pro & M3 Max), which are produced via a modern 3 nm process. We've already reviewed the new entry-level model of the MacBook Pro 14 with its new M3 SoC (as a replacement for the old MacBook Pro 13 with the Touch Bar) in detail. Now we take a closer look at the new M3, which will also be used in the upcoming generation of the popular MacBook Air models. We also compare its performance and efficiency with CPUs/GPUs from AMD, Intel and Nvidia. Lastly, we draw a comparison with the new Snapdragon X Elite, which Qualcomm recently presented to the public. An analysis article on the M3 Pro/M3 Max will also appear shortly.
Apple M3 at a glance
The M3 SoC is Apple's new entry-level chip and, like its predecessor, will be used in both the MacBook Pro and the desktop computers (with active cooling) as well as the MacBook Air with passive cooling, as was the case in the last two generations. While the configuration of the cores has changed in the faster M3 Pro/M3 Max, the configuration of the base M3 remains the same.
On the CPU side, there is a performance cluster with 4 cores that reach a maximum of 4.056 GHz (or ~3.6 GHz when all cores are loaded) and an efficiency cluster with 4 cores that reach a maximum of 2.748 GHz. Thanks to the new 3 nm production (presumably N3B process at TSMC), Apple has been able to significantly increase the clock speeds without making any major compromises in terms of power consumption. In addition, the number of transistors has been increased from 20 billion in the M2 to 25 billion.
There have been some major changes to the integrated graphics card. The M3 still comes in versions with 8 GPU cores (used in the iMac and presumably in the base model of the upcoming MacBook Air models) as well as in more powerful versions with 10 GPU cores, like in the MacBook Pro 14. However, Apple has overhauled the entire architecture of the GPU and now uses dynamic caching, where cache and memory are allocated dynamically based on the actual requirements of applications. In addition, the M3 now supports hardware-based ray tracing, mesh shading and AV1 decoding. However, only two displays can be used at a time.
Like the old M2 SoC, the M3 SoC can be equipped with either 8 GB, 16 GB or a maximum of 24 GB of RAM.
Top 10 Laptops
Multimedia, Budget Multimedia, Gaming, Budget Gaming, Lightweight Gaming, Business, Budget Office, Workstation, Subnotebooks, Ultrabooks, Chromebooks
under 300 USD/Euros, under 500 USD/Euros, 1,000 USD/Euros, for University Students, Best Displays
Top 10 Smartphones
Smartphones, Phablets, ≤6-inch, Camera Smartphones
Testing procedure
So that we can make a meaningful comparison between the different laptops, we not only look at pure performance in the synthetic benchmarks, but also the power consumption, from which we then determine the efficiency. The consumption measurements are always carried out on an external display so that we can eliminate the different internal displays as influencing factors. Nevertheless, we measure the overall consumption of the system here and do not just rely on the displayed values for the CPU and GPU.
Single-core performance
Apple has been able to increase the single-core performance of the new M3 processor by around 20% over the old M2 and around 18% compared to the M2 Pro. Compared to the old M1 processor, the M3 is 30% more powerful. The power consumption of the CPU itself (according to Power Metrics) was around 6.5 watts at the beginning of benchmark testing before increasing to 5.5 watts later on, which is why the power consumption has increased slightly compared to the old M2. Despite the significantly higher performance, Apple has still been able to increase efficiency by around 18% compared to the M2 in the MacBook Pro 13, which is an excellent result. However, the lead over the passively cooled MacBook Air models is smaller.
Single-Core Performance Rating - Percent | |
Apple M3 | |
Apple M2 Pro | |
Apple M2 Pro 10-Core | |
Apple M2 | |
Apple M2 | |
Apple M1 Pro | |
Apple M1 Pro 8-Core | |
Apple M1 | |
Apple M1 |
Cinebench R23 - Single Core | |
Apple M3 | |
Apple M2 Pro | |
Apple M2 Pro 10-Core | |
Apple M2 | |
Apple M2 | |
Apple M1 Pro | |
Apple M1 Pro 8-Core | |
Apple M1 | |
Apple M1 |
Geekbench 5.5 - Single-Core | |
Apple M3 | |
Apple M2 Pro | |
Apple M2 | |
Apple M2 Pro 10-Core | |
Apple M2 | |
Apple M1 Pro 8-Core | |
Apple M1 Pro | |
Apple M1 | |
Apple M1 |
Power Consumption / Cinebench R23 Single Power Efficiency - external Monitor | |
Apple M3 | |
Apple M2 | |
Apple M1 | |
Apple M2 | |
Apple M2 Pro | |
Apple M2 Pro 10-Core | |
Apple M1 Pro |
Power Consumption / Cinebench R23 Single (external Monitor) | |
Apple M1 Pro | |
Apple M2 Pro 10-Core | |
Apple M2 Pro | |
Apple M3 | |
Apple M2 | |
Apple M1 | |
Apple M2 |
* ... smaller is better
Multicore performance
Multicore performance has also increased by around 20% compared to the old M2 in the MacBook Pro 13, although the power consumption of the CPU cores has increased slightly too. The M2 consumes just under 20 watts, while the M3 needs 20-21 watts at full load. This puts the new M3 just ahead of the old entry-level 8-core M1 Pro, but all other MacBook Pro CPUs are still faster. On the other hand, efficiency has also increased here, but the lead of 8% over the M2 in the MBP 13 is not quite as high as in single-core load.
Multi-Core Performance Rating - Percent | |
Apple M2 Pro | |
Apple M1 Pro | |
Apple M2 Pro 10-Core | |
Apple M3 | |
Apple M1 Pro 8-Core | |
Apple M2 | |
Apple M2 | |
Apple M1 | |
Apple M1 |
Cinebench R23 - Multi Core | |
Apple M2 Pro | |
Apple M1 Pro | |
Apple M2 Pro 10-Core | |
Apple M3 | |
Apple M1 Pro 8-Core | |
Apple M2 | |
Apple M2 | |
Apple M1 | |
Apple M1 |
Geekbench 5.5 - Multi-Core | |
Apple M2 Pro | |
Apple M1 Pro | |
Apple M2 Pro 10-Core | |
Apple M3 | |
Apple M1 Pro 8-Core | |
Apple M2 | |
Apple M2 | |
Apple M1 | |
Apple M1 |
Power Consumption / Cinebench R23 Multi Power Efficiency - external Monitor | |
Apple M3 | |
Apple M2 | |
Apple M2 | |
Apple M1 | |
Apple M1 Pro | |
Apple M2 Pro | |
Apple M2 Pro 10-Core |
Power Consumption / Cinebench R23 Multi (external Monitor) | |
Apple M2 Pro | |
Apple M2 Pro 10-Core | |
Apple M1 Pro | |
Apple M3 | |
Apple M2 | |
Apple M2 | |
Apple M1 |
* ... smaller is better
Apple M3 vs. AMD, Intel & Qualcomm
Now we compare the Apple M3 with the current mobile processors from AMD, Intel and Qualcomm. In selecting the comparison devices, we focused primarily on the U series chips from AMD and the U/P series from Intel. We've also included individual H45 and HS chips with comparatively low TDP values (max. 50 watts) in for comparison, even if these do not represent direct competition for the M3. We have also included the Snapdragon 8cx Gen3 in the Microsoft Surface Pro 9 in the tables.
Starting with single-core performance, we can clearly see what progress Apple has made with the M3. Despite lower power consumption, the M3's performance core can easily keep up with the performance cores of the current Raptor Lake CPUs from Intel, which require significantly more power. Even the most efficient Intel chip in our comparison, the Core i7-1355U, falls behind by a factor of 3. The current AMD Zen4 chips "only" fall behind by a factor of two in terms of efficiency, but do not match the performance of the M3 either. The Snapdragon 8cx Gen3 can only keep up to a certain extent in the Geekbench test (-28%), but falls far behind in the significantly longer R23 single test (-68%) and only just comes in ahead of the Intel CPUs in terms of efficiency.
Cinebench R23 - Single Core | |
Intel Core i7-13700H | |
Apple M3 | |
Intel Core i7-1360P | |
Intel Core i7-1365U | |
AMD Ryzen 7 7840S | |
Intel Core i7-1355U | |
AMD Ryzen 7 7840U | |
AMD Ryzen 9 PRO 7940HS | |
Qualcomm Snapdragon 8cx Gen 3 |
Geekbench 5.5 - Single-Core | |
Apple M3 | |
AMD Ryzen 7 7840S | |
Intel Core i7-1365U | |
Intel Core i7-13700H | |
Intel Core i7-1360P | |
AMD Ryzen 9 PRO 7940HS | |
Intel Core i7-1355U | |
AMD Ryzen 7 7840U | |
Qualcomm Snapdragon 8cx Gen 3 |
Power Consumption - Cinebench R23 Single Power Efficiency - external Monitor | |
Apple M3 | |
AMD Ryzen 7 7840U | |
AMD Ryzen 9 PRO 7940HS | |
Qualcomm Snapdragon 8cx Gen 3 | |
Intel Core i7-1355U | |
Intel Core i7-13700H | |
Intel Core i7-1365U | |
AMD Ryzen 7 7840S | |
Intel Core i7-1360P |
The tide turns a little in the multicore tests, as some competitors from AMD and Intel offer better performance, especially in the Cinebench R23 test. Since the M3 does not support hyperthreading, the result is nevertheless still very good. However, the two U-series processors from Intel (only two performance cores) fall behind and the Qualcomm chip once again has no chance at all (-68%). In the short Geekbench test, the Apple chip is significantly better and is only narrowly surpassed by the AMD Ryzen 7 7840S.
In terms of efficiency, the differences are significantly smaller than in the single-core load and the Ryzen 7 7840U is practically on par. The other CPUs from AMD and Intel fall behind and the Qualcomm chip once again stands no chance here.
Cinebench R23 / Multi Core | |
AMD Ryzen 7 7840S | |
AMD Ryzen 9 PRO 7940HS | |
AMD Ryzen 7 7840U | |
Intel Core i7-13700H | |
Intel Core i7-1360P | |
Apple M3 | |
Intel Core i7-1365U | |
Intel Core i7-1355U | |
Qualcomm Snapdragon 8cx Gen 3 |
Geekbench 5.5 / Multi-Core | |
AMD Ryzen 7 7840S | |
Intel Core i7-1360P | |
Apple M3 | |
Intel Core i7-13700H | |
AMD Ryzen 9 PRO 7940HS | |
AMD Ryzen 7 7840U | |
Intel Core i7-1365U | |
Intel Core i7-1355U | |
Qualcomm Snapdragon 8cx Gen 3 |
Power Consumption / Cinebench R23 Multi Power Efficiency - external Monitor | |
Apple M3 | |
AMD Ryzen 7 7840U | |
AMD Ryzen 9 PRO 7940HS | |
AMD Ryzen 7 7840S | |
Intel Core i7-1355U | |
Intel Core i7-1365U | |
Intel Core i7-13700H | |
Intel Core i7-1360P | |
Qualcomm Snapdragon 8cx Gen 3 |
GPU performance & efficiency
In all graphics tests, the new 10-core M3 GPU has a 10-22% lead over the old 10-core M2 GPU, but maximum power consumption has also increased from ~13.5 watts for the M2 to ~15 watts for the M3. However, all past Pro GPUs from Apple (whether M1 or M2) are even faster, even the base 14-core M14 Pro.
Compared to the Windows competition, the M3 GPU clearly outperforms the AMD Radeon 780M and the Iris Xe Graphics G7 in particular in both 3DMark Wildlife Extreme Unlimited and GFXBench, but the Apple GPU has to concede defeat to the Radeon 780M in the Geekbench OpenCL test. Dedicated mid-range Nvidia GPUs (from RTX 3050 upwards) are significantly more powerful and naturally also consume much more power (from 35 watts upwards). We have also included these results for better classification.
When examining efficiency, we more or less have to use Witcher 3, as we have the most comparative values for this stored in our database and the CPU load is quite low. Of course, this is not an optimal starting point for the MacBooks and the values are not completely comparable with the Windows laptops, since only the emulated version runs on the Macs via CrossOver, which also costs some performance. We carried out this test on MacBooks for the first time last year, namely on the M2 Pro models, and they took top place in the comparison field and were later only overtaken by the M2 MacBook Air 15. The new MacBook Pro 14 M3 is 8% more efficient.
Apple M3 vs. Qualcomm Snapdragon X Elite
Shortly before the announcement of Apple's new M3 processors, Qualcomm presented the Snapdragon X Elite and showed benchmarks for two reference designs with 23 and 80 watts. Of course, we also compare these results with the new Apple M3, for which we employed the Cinebench 2024, Geekbench 6.2 and GFXBench benchmarks (Aztec Ruins Normal Tier Offscreen) used by Qualcomm.
Qualcomm has a noticeable advantage in multicore performance with both reference systems (depending on the test, between 17-33% with 23 watts or 27-71% with 80 watts). However, this is a comparison with the slowest of the new M3 chips and we can already reveal that the M3 Pro (12 cores) with 28 watts is faster than the Qualcomm reference design with 80 watts, at least in Geekbench Multi.
In single-core tests, the Apple M3 easily outperforms the strong-performing Snapdragon X Elite. It will be interesting to see how much power the Qualcomm chip actually needs under single-core load.
In the GPU benchmark from Qualcomm, the result is quite clear, as the 10-core M3 GPU (with a maximum consumption of 15 watts) is able to outperform Qualcomm's small reference system by 12% and is only 7% behind the 80-watt system. However, the 18-core GPU of the new M3 Pro is clearly superior at 580 FPS.
Verdict - Apple's first 3 nm chip is a complete success
Upon switching from the M1 to the M2, Apple improved the performance of the chips through higher clock speeds, but at the cost of higher power consumption due to the same manufacturing process (5 nm). With the M3, the basic core configuration remains identical for both the CPU and the GPU, but clock speeds are once again higher. Thanks to the modern 3 nm manufacturing process, this only has a minimal impact on power consumption and so Apple has been able to improve both performance and efficiency.
Apple was able to improve processor performance by almost 20% in both the single-core and multicore tests. Single-core performance in particular is now on par with the fast performance cores from Intel's current Raptor Lake generation, which consume a lot more power. The advantage over AMD's Zen4 processors is also clear here, as they are unable to compete with the M3 in terms of efficiency or pure performance. In the multi-core tests, however, things change and both the Zen4 processors (from the Ryzen 7 U series) and the Raptor Lake P processors from Intel offer more performance, but the Intel CPUs are much less efficient. Intel's U series, such as the current Core i7-1365U, also fall behind in multi-core performance. AMD's Zen4 chips, such as the Ryzen 7 7840U, are practically on par in terms of multi-core efficiency. AMD may well overtake Apple with the upcoming Ryzen 8000 chips at the beginning of 2024.
More performance with higher efficiency - Apple delivers with the new M3 and the upcoming MacBook Air models will also benefit from the performance boost.
In terms of graphics performance, there is an advantage of up to 20% compared to the M2. Even though power consumption has increased slightly, we still see a slight improvement in efficiency and the current iGPUs from AMD (Radeon 780M) and Intel (Iris Xe Graphics G7) fall significantly behind. Only in the OpenCL test can the Radeon 780M easily hold its own against the M3 GPU.
The comparisons with the new Qualcomm Snapdragon X Elite are also very interesting because the Snapdragon seems to have an advantage, especially in terms of multicore performance. However, graphics performance is weaker than the Apple M3, at least in the small reference design with 23 watts, and we only have a very limited number of benchmarks presented by Qualcomm. The numbers show a massive improvement over the previous 8cx Gen3 chips, but we'll have to wait and see when the first devices come onto the market and how performance values actually turn out in the end.