I hope so. Do you have a link/reference for the write endurance spec, or testing, on Apple SSDs?
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.
Concerning the "M1 is better with RAM" myth
- Thread starter leman
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I hope so. Do you have a link/reference for the write endurance spec, or testing, on Apple SSDs?
There have been numerous reports of M1 macs displaying a SMART % used. These extrapolate to about 1600TBW for a 256GB drive (which equate to 3200TBW for a 256GB drive, 6400TBW for a 1TB drive). Some have questioned these numbers (too high?), but even taking them at 50% gives you no worries in all but the most "off the record" cases.
Both the RAM and SSD are soldered onto the logic board. They used a desoldering table to remove the SSD and RAM chips, replacing them with higher capacity modules.
Yeah. I'm just not sure how linear the "percentage used" actually is. From what I can recall, my MacBook Pro said 0% or 1% used for the longest time, then seemed to quite quickly go up to 15% within a few months. It's SSD also seems a bit slower than it used to be, or at least, less consistent in speed. And this is after "only" 119 TBW.
Aging SSDs can definitely slow down. Write Amplification can affect performance as well as endurance.
The NVMe spec just says that Percentage Used is a vendor specified estimate. It doesn't require it be linear or not linear. The vendor should also specify the TBW specification so that the user has a way of predicting drive longevity but since Apple doesn't provide that, all we can do is extrapolate from the % Used number and estimate the TBW value. Apple hasn't given us any other choice.