AirPods Pro 3 are here, but should you buy AirPods Pro 2 instead if they’re a bargain? Here’s the price I’d pay, having tested both

Apple‘s much-anticipated AirPods Pro 3 are now available to buy at last, bringing improvements to the sound quality, active noise cancellation, and battery life over AirPods Pro 2.

I’ve written a longer comparison of what specs are different between AirPods Pro 3 and AirPods Pro 2, so I won’t go into all the details here, but actually there aren’t that many differences – the new Live Translation feature, for example, is available on both.

I’ve been comparing AirPods Pro 3 to their predecessors since launch day, and it really is mainly about the quality of the audio and ANC, and how important it is for you to have eight hours of battery life instead of six hours (and 10 hours with Transparency mode on, which is important for the Hearing Aid mode). When it comes to features, they’re pretty much right in line with each other.

Even the price is basically the same – in the US, Apple has kept the exact same $249 price. In the UK, Apple actually dropped the price of the Pro 3, launching them at just £219, down from £229. In Australia, the price as risen from AU$299 to AU$429.

While AirPods Pro 3 officially replace AirPods Pro 2, with the latter being removed from Apple’s own store, there’s still lots of AirPods Pro 2 stock around at other retailers. This means you have the choice of which one to buy. Given the prices, it’s a slam dunk to get to get the new ones in the US and UK, right?

Well, hold on. The thing about AirPods Pro 2 over the last year or two is that they’ve kept receiving huge discounts. In Amazon‘s big Prime Day sale a few months ago, AirPods Pro 2 dropped to just $149, for example. The new model might be shiny and improved, but are they $100 more improved?

My experience of using AirPods Pro 3 is that they’re clearly a step up in terms of the richness of the sound, and the effectiveness of the active noise cancellation. They’re a little crisper all around, meaning there’s a touch of extra detail and realism to instruments and voices in most cases, for example. They also have improved bass that both feels a little more resonant, while also feeling slightly better controlled. They’re a bit more expansive too, delivering a sound that’s slightly bigger and broader – and this translates well through to spatial audio in movies.

And the noise cancellation is stunningly effective – I can walk along a road with traffic when music is playing at a comfortable volume well below 50%, and hear absolutely nothing from the outside. Not just a near-total reduction – truly nothing, a total bubble of silence. Listening to podcasts, traffic is able to seep in more, but it’s still a clear improvement over AirPods Pro 2.

In the office, the noise cancellation is too effective if anything – there’s absolute no chance of me hearing someone trying to get my attention. I know for some this will be considered a plus, but I quite like the fellow inmates of TechRadar Towers.

However, so far I would say these differences aren’t enough to be game-changing. They’re better, for sure, they’re just not “Oh wow, I’m blown away” different.

And there’s one element that some people think is a step back: the fit of the eartips. It’s good that Apple has included a new smaller XXS size, because the new-design “foam-infused” eartips (which help the impressive ANC) are much firmer than the AirPods Pro 2’s tips, and I can feel that in the ear.

Some people online are saying they find this change different and uncomfortable enough that they’re sending the AirPods Pro 3 back. I definitely don’t find them uncomfortable enough for that, but I’m much more aware of them being in my ears than AirPods Pro 2, which I could totally forget about when wearing.

I’m fine with that as the trade-off for the improved noise cancellation, but I can also understand that some people would rather have the least amount of physical feeling from their earbuds – based on my experience, AirPods Pro 2 is the way to go if that’s you.

So basically, having tried both, I think while AirPods Pro 2 are around, and when discounted, they’re definitely worth considering. But what price would I pay, where they feel like the right value compared to the improvements in AirPods Pro 3? Let’s explore.

Apple AirPods Pro 3 next to AirPods Pro 2

The AirPods Pro 3 case (right) is just a little larger than the AirPods Pro 2 case (Image credit: Future)

The US price I’d want to see

In the US, I think if the build-up to Black Friday brings us AirPods Pro 2 prices that match the $150 lowest price they’ve hit before – or even lower – then there’s a very good argument to get those instead and save yourself $100 in these trying times.

Their sound is still detailed, full and enjoyable energetic – even if the new version delivers more bass nuance and more dynamic edge. They have great Dolby Atmos spatial audio including head tracking, the active noise cancellation is highly effective, and they offer basically every one of the most advanced features that any version of AirPods offers.

At the time of writing, AirPods Pro 2 cost $199 at Amazon, and I think I’d probably pay $50 more for the longer battery life and extra noise-blocking power of the new version for that price.

But as they drop below this price, they increase how tempting they are. Exactly where they tip into being worth is ultimately up to you – at $189, I feel like I’d probably still get the new one. At $169, I’m probably starting to think about what else I could do with the $80. And like I said, at $149 I think they’re arguably the better value of the two.

The UK price I’d like to see

At the time of writing, I can see AirPods Pro 2 in the UK for £199 at lots of places, with laptopsdirect.co.uk selling them for their record-low £179 price. But with a £40 saving compared to AirPods Pro 3, I’d go for the newer model, personally.

I don’t think there’s any chance we’ll see a full £100 discount in the UK to match the $100 discount we’ve seen in the US. I think £159 is probably as cheap as we can hope to see, and I’m far from certain they’ll fall that low – but a £60 saving is definitely in the kind of range where it’s worth strongly considering the older model.

I think I personally would probably still go for the newer model at that price, but if you’ve any qualms about using the firmer in-ear tips, it would make sense to save money and get the older model.