$1030 for the i3 with 8 GB and a 3rd party SSD vs $2399 to spec an i3/8/2TB. Even considering the SSD would not be nearly as fast, I think everyone has to admit that is pretty crazy.
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
$1030 for the i3 with 8 GB and a 3rd party SSD vs $2399 to spec an i3/8/2TB. Even considering the SSD would not be nearly as fast, I think everyone has to admit that is pretty crazy.
Even more crazy: i7/32GB/2TB = $3299 from Apple
BYO: i7/8GB/128GB = $1099 (boot drive only)
Add: 2TB Samsung T5 = $600 (data)
32GB RAM = $300
Total = $1999 (a saving of $1300)
So unless you really need a super fast internal SSD, the savings can be massive.
yeah killing the internal ssd access made me not buy the new mini. the toshiba they use is mid grade plenty of other nvme m.2 ssd are better. they made poor choices here
And that's the rub. Apple spec'd out an SSD that is faster than most people need and is making everyone pay for it and then some. What's worse is that most people that truly need that kind of speed would never use or trust an internal drive for their data!
The Samsung 970 Pro is probably faster and 512GB is down to $177 with no tax.
Apple builds $600 + Tax into the price into the price of their offering.
Pure extortion since they solder it to the motherboard.
I will eventually yield to their extortion, but that does mean I have to like it.
Today's Apple seems to charge too much for a lot of things, but as long as people continue to buy those overpriced products, they have no reason to stop.
Going on a forum to complain means nothing if your intention is to buy it anyway...
I hear you, but I finally said enough is enough and have delayed purchasing another Mac, possibly permanently. Never say never, but at this point instead of a mini or iMac, I am going to use my self-built PC, and if I need another laptop will likely look at something outside of the Mac world. Unless there are drastic changes, I can no longer justify paying a growing premium for what is now at best a comparable and at worst inferior product.
This is true for me in regards to all of the Apple offerings. In the past I did not give more than a passing glance to alternatives. Going forward Apple will have to compete with the alternatives for me, and if they do not justify their cost, I am prepared to start going with the alternatives.
Good for you I grabbed a dell optiplex for veterans day sale .
It was on their outlet business store.
3 year warranty
i7 8700t 6 cores with threads a bit slower then apple six core i7 8700 b but uses 35 watts
a toshiba nvme m.2 256gb ss that unlike apples is removable
since it uses the t model lower power i7 room for a sata drive I added a 512 gb intel ssd
1 stick of 16gb ram speed 2400
I added 1 stick of 16gb ram speed 2133
so I have 32 gb ram at 2133.
the gear on the sale with rebates etc was 603 - 36 = 567
add the ssd for 83 I went to 650
I had the ram laying around so the ram upgrade was free.
I am not saying apple should sell the six core for 603.
but they could have sold a 128gb ssd that is replaceable
and the i7 six core could have been
i7 8770t
8gb upgrade able
128gb ssd upgrade able
price 999
I won't go into the fact the dell is a pleasure to work on.
I will not be buying the new mini.
I may sell one my one 2014 with 4 gb base model
I may buy a 2014 with 8gb and iris 5100 gpu
this would be about a 200 dollar cost to do
If you do a search for 1TB SSD drives on Newegg you see there is a pretty significant price difference between models. Some models are in fact more than the $600 Apple price and the storage Apple uses is some of the fastest in the industry. Speed comes at a price.
So calling it a rip off is not accurate at all. They just happen to provide the top performing storage the industry provides vs cheap lower performing SSD storage. Sure they could also use slower SSD drives and bring the cost down but that is far from a ripoff. The storage in the Mini represents top performance for many years to come and few will ever feel it is getting too slow as data needs increase in the future. In five years when PC users will need to "upgrade" their lower performing storage the Mini will still run at incredibly fast speeds.
The toshiba is not top of the line like the Samsung is.
The 500 gb runs about 100
the 1 tb is about 180
The 2 tb is around 450 to 750
These are eBay prices
The xg5-p is the same as apples
I just went to amazon and the 2tb is 550
And Apple was 1400
That is if you upgrade on the i5
If you upgrade on the i3 it is 1600
This is a lot of markup 550 to 1400
Or 550 on Amazon to 1600 on apple not worth the coin for my needs.
And they welded it in.
Last edited:
Except something like the Samsung 970 Evo is faster than the storage in the Mini and way cheaper.
A couple of things:
- A lot of users cannot tell the difference between slower SSDs and faster SSDs. The difference between them is not nearly as drastic as mechanical HD to SSD.
- At least PC users will be able to upgrade their SSDs in the future. Mac users are forever stuck with the storage they select at the time of purchase.
I think this is 2005 thinking. PCs have caught up with the Mac in terms of longevity I think. And as another said, at least you can upgrade it if you wanted to. Even better, when the drive fails, a PC user will be able to replace it and keep moving. Current Macs will be forced into an expensive repair, an external disk, or the scrap heap. Honestly, there is really no good pro-consumer argument for the path Apple have taken here.
The type of storage Apple uses is more/less like Server SSD storage and is durable and allows a lot more read and writes and is faster than most out there. It costs a lot more too.
Here is a good explanation on the differences.
https://www.kingston.com/us/ssd/enterprise/best_practices/enterprise_versus_client_ssd
[doublepost=1543945536][/doublepost]https://www.applegazette.com/mac/how-apples-solid-state-hard-drives-work/
Last edited:
I bought a Samsung SSD T5 2tb external usb-c tiny drive, it works great and it's so small it doesn't weight down or bulk up my laptop case.
Perhaps I missed it but where does either reference state Apple drives are more / less like server SSD storage?
The reality is Apple drives are no better than top tier SSDs. In fact the last reference states Apple uses the same NAND as the competition:
"We can surmise they use Samsung for their NAND..."
Face it, Apple is charging more for their SSDs because people are willing to pay it. Just like people are willing to pay higher prices to HP and IBM for their upgrades. Don't try and excuse the higher prices by attempting to make their offerings something that they're not.
The reality is you don't have a clue. So many different types of SSDs and you can't just say Apple uses the same type as everyone else when they don't. Again, depending if apple is using SLC, TLC or MLC drives, it will change the $$$$ dramatically. Due to the speed, it is either MLC or SLC drives and those are alot more expensive over the competition has over normal consumer level drives. You need to face it yourself that some SSDs are designed a lot better, last longer, and cost more.
[doublepost=1543950074][/doublepost]Here is an example of Enterprise grade SSD pricing.
https://www.cdw.com/product/Dell-so...kwcid=AL!4223!3!279474345289!!!g!301813042544!
Last edited:
Can you provide a credible reference that specifies which type of NAND Apple's SSDs utilize?
Regardless I think it's safe to say Apple isn't using a type of NAND that other manufacturers cannot use themselves. Especially when your reference speculates the Apple NAND is that of their "competitor" (i.e. Samsung). If Samsung makes the NAND for Apple then why can't they make that same NAND for their own products? You're right: Nothing is stopping them.
Actually, can you provide it since you said it first that they use the same type of SSD out there as everyone else?
Right, you can't, because you don't know.
I don't know, that's why I asked (though I suspect it's not pure SLC). Given we know I don't know why don't you tell me?
My point is, lets not make assumptions. We don't know what kind of SSD is in it. It could be the cheapest one out there like the 970 evo, but I doubt that. I am willing to bet it's either middle to higher tier grade of SSD and that is why it costs so much. You can see the prices for 1tb go anywhere from $120 to $1000 depending on the grade tier you buy.
It's almost like someone at work when we tell them we are low on storage on our SAN, and they say, can't you just go buy disks. I say no, because they are expensive. But they say, well isn't 10 tb like $300 bucks. I tell them, not for enterprise level storage. It costs us $50k just to add 10 tb of storage.
LOL. It's people that do not understand that which will think, why it's so expensive.
Of the two of us involved in this discussion one has admitted they do not know which type of NAND Apple is using and as such asked the other what type of NAND is being used for the Apple SSDs.
If you're going to use speed as an indicator then I'd like to obtain your thoughts on this:
Apple 1TB write speed: 2.6GB/sec
https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/mac-mini-2018-128gb-ssd-speed.2153608/#post-26785124
Samsung 1TB write speed: 2.5GB/sec
https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/samsung-970-evo-ssd-review,5573-2.html
I consider the 100MB/sec within the margin of error which can result from different test configurations, tools, devices, etc. For all intents and purposes the two are identical.
Since neither of you seems inclined to look it up, the best I can tell is that is Toshiba flash memory soldered to the logic board. There is no information on what type of storage it is, so speculating that it is of higher quality or similar quality is simply that; speculation.
Having said that, even if it was "higher quality" it still seems a poor decision to spec the most expensive type of drive when the vast majority of users will never realize the difference and the drive could still fail. I mean who is arguing against trading not terribly noticeable speed (in fact no real gain on the smaller drives) for a cheaper, more easily replaced option? I think a slotted M2 would have been a much more logical choice here.
[doublepost=1543953552][/doublepost]
I am not sure what grounds you would have to assume they are not using the cheapest available. Business sense says they are not probably speccing out some high end storage in what is essentially a consumer facing machine. I mean this company won't even bundle a headphone adapter anymore. I think it is far more likely they are not choosing "server-grade" drives.
Having said that, even if it was "higher quality" it still seems a poor decision to spec the most expensive type of drive when the vast majority of users will never realize the difference and the drive could still fail. I mean who is arguing against trading not terribly noticeable speed (in fact no real gain on the smaller drives) for a cheaper, more easily replaced option? I think a slotted M2 would have been a much more logical choice here.
[doublepost=1543953552][/doublepost]
I am not sure what grounds you would have to assume they are not using the cheapest available. Business sense says they are not probably speccing out some high end storage in what is essentially a consumer facing machine. I mean this company won't even bundle a headphone adapter anymore. I think it is far more likely they are not choosing "server-grade" drives.
How do you know this? Do you think there's the possibility that one of us attempted to look it up but was unable to find an answer and thus asked the other, who presented the position they know, what the answer was?
I agree 100% with this. The Samsung 970 EVO comes with a 5 year warranty. Apple supplies, at best if you pay extra money, a 3 year warranty on theirs.
970 Evo provides comparable performance with a longer warranty for a lower price. In the end it's all irrelevant as you can't use one in a Mac Mini. You have to purchase the Apple drive.
Again, quit making the assumption that it is the same quality ssds as those. Performance speaks for itself compared to a lot of other laptops out there.
[doublepost=1543957588][/doublepost]
It would not be a poor decision as Apple wants their products to stay reliable and they want the drives to last. The cheaper drives have a life of around 3-5 years at an average read/write. The higher end drives can go much longer and number of writes it can handle.
I'm the one saying to stop assuming they are low quality drives with all these prices that are being thrown around. I don't think Apple is ripping us off as I do believe they are using a middle grade SSD in it and not a low grade one.
Last edited: