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.
Apple wants $600 for 1TB SSD while Samsung's 1TB m.2 sells for $229
- Thread starter Tom80112
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Is there anything to suggest Apple or non-Apple has insufficient endurance for the intended market?
I only know that I had to refresh an 850 EVO after it became unbearably slow. I avoided TLC after that.
Why are you bringing up T2? It absolutely irrelevant to the pricing discussion, Apple ships T2 on every single Mac Mini, wether it has the criminal 128GB or 2TB, yet Apple is charging a ridiculous exponential premium on higher storage, why?
With regards to your comments about retail pricing, that's ridiculous as well. If anything a large manufacturer like Apple should be able to get huge discount pricing because they purchase in volume, and the cost would be significantly less than retail. We are seeing Apple charge about twice as much as retail, it's nonsense.
With regards to TLC and MLC you have a point, but you are wrongly and arrogantly dismissing Samsung's Pro line which is MLC and comparable if not better than Apple's, (Samsung gives you 5 years of warranty, Apple 1 year). Heck, Apple has been known to source storage from Toshiba and Samsung in the past, they are not using magical unicorns in their SSDs.
The bottom line and the point that is getting lost, is that everyone with an objective mindset agrees that Apple is ripping off and charging the Apple premium tax on SSDs, and the discrepancy in pricing is ridiculous. That's the fact.
And by the way, the same exact thing is happening with RAM. Exponentially ridiculous pricing on RAM as well.
I think most of us would understand the Apple premium tax, but it's just too disproportionate nowadays.
Last edited:
The Samsung is likely a (now industry standard) TLC SSD, whereas Apple traditionally have used MLC. With MLC you're looking in the region of 10,000 write cycles for each cell, before it starts degrading - with TLC that can be more like 5-800. Arguably with drives of 1TB that is *less* important than smaller (128Gig?) capacities unless you're filling the drive to near capacity.
But 2018 TLC is supposed to be better than 2015 TLC.
I will still gravitate towards MLC.
Samsung 970 Pro SSD is MLC: https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/samsung-970-pro-ssd-review,5572.html
And Samsung's 1TB is about half as much as Apple's
[doublepost=1542585954][/doublepost]
That's fine, but like I said, T2 in 128GB and T2 in 2TB Mac Mini is the same chip. Is it not?
T2 is part of the SSD, an SSD is made from memory modules and a crontroller. without T2 there would be just a bunch of memory modules, Apple no longer use SSD third party controllers. So we could basically say T2 is partially an Apple SSD.
So to wrap up, I’m bringing it up becase you compared a bunch of TLC memory with a samsung controller with a bunch of MLC modules with a T2 controller.
The fact that you don’t care about T2 benefits and encoding does not change the facts, I can understand that you don’t need them like I can understand that you may not need a mac at all, never said otherwise.
Yeah I would think there will be continuing improvement of TLC, SSDs usually now come with wear levelling software which helps significantly (again, as long as you're not filling up the drive more than about 80%). MLC will always be better, they might improve TLC somewhat, but even if they can double it to ~1600 write cycles, that's still way off the 10,000 MLC are usually rated for.
Honestly I think if we're talking 1TB drives it really becomes a lot less important though, as ultimately you're going to have to write petabytes of data before you start to see significant failure. It's more an issue for 128/256 sized drives.
It’s precisely what I said from the beginning comparison must be done with the pro version not the evo
Wrong, look at my earlier post, I refer to Samsung MLC.
And I care about T2, but T2 is not the factor that it's increasing pricing. T2 pricing is the same for the 128gb or for the 2tb. The factor increasing pricing is Apple greed/tax/premium.
You just don’t know why the T2 is related and that speed is not the point between tlc and mlc memory, I’m not angry at you.
Good to know they're still producing it - I guess it makes sense as Apple have to be sourcing theirs from somewhere.
Apple's always gouged on storage pricing/ upgrades - I still can't believe they're offering a 256GB MacBook pro for £2,349 and the 128GB model is pretty much the 16GB iPhone 6s come again...
Samsung provides a five year warranty on their 970 EVO SSD. What does Apple provide?
Let's not forget Apple forces you to pay those jacked-up prices for SSD and CPU upgrades
by soldering the CPU and SSD to the motherboard. I see 4 Apple objectives hard at work:
1. Let's force the customer to pay more by eliminating 3rd party upgrades.
2. Let's screw mother earth by creating more landfill when CPUs or SSDs die making the computer too expensive to repair.
3. Let's force the customer to buy a whole new machine when either the CPU or SSD dies.
4. Let's make tons of money.
Steve Jobs was all about making the best computer for the user.
Tom Cook is a businessman who is all about making the most profit on every device apple makes.
I prefer Steve Jobs.
Those defending Apple pricing on SSDs, I'm also curious on what you think with regards to Apple's pricing with RAM. It's pretty much the same ridiculous pricing over RAM bought from trustworthy and quality retail vendors.
If we look at Apple's price gouging of RAM for example, how they have traditionally ripped off customers, we see the clear pattern that Apple is doing exactly the same with SSDs.
Look I think many of us can accept the Apple tax if it were a bit more balanced. It's just the difference now is so outrageous, it's hard to believe and justify.
If we look at Apple's price gouging of RAM for example, how they have traditionally ripped off customers, we see the clear pattern that Apple is doing exactly the same with SSDs.
Look I think many of us can accept the Apple tax if it were a bit more balanced. It's just the difference now is so outrageous, it's hard to believe and justify.
Last edited:
I have no objection to Apple charging what they want for their products, after all Apple (and other sellers) are free to charge what they want for their products. What I take issue with is people attempting to rationalize the higher prices with bogus claims Apple products somehow are superior to lower cost alternatives. While that may be true in some cases it's certainly not when it comes to RAM and SSD pricing.
If you quoting me I precisely said they cost twice, and Apple has been always expensive, I don’t have to defend the richest company in the world In fact any company at all, I just Contributed because I like technology and I know how the Apple drive works, or the difference between mlc and tcl.
If we want to state that Apple is expensive all I can tell you is “really?” Is this something new? When was cheap did I miss something?
But there is no reason to compare Apple to oranges to try to enfatise this, plus some people may have learned (I doubt) what the T2 does which I think is interesting regardless if you are going to buy it or not.
I just placed dot on the i, I have no care in the world to talk about price, I can afford a mac and I want macs that’s all there is in my personal agenda.
Oh absolutely it's new, this discussion is relevant because it's the first time the criminal 128gb is soldered on a mac mini board, in the past we could have bought an equally good or better product from 3rd party and done the installation ourselves, like we can with RAM. Now we can't.
There is T2 chip, even if it wasn’t soldered what would you have done? Plug it and work with two controllers toghether? Shut down the T2?
I have nothing new to say in regards of the overprice everyone know they are, so there is nothing I can add to the topic, I have already stated twice, it cost double you either take it or not so it’s not interesting for me.