M2 Pro 512GB MBP SSD Slower Than M1 Pro 512GB MBP

[ryansebiz]

Apple used four 128GB NAND chips used in the M1 Pro 512GB MBP, but only used two 256GB NAND chips in the M2 Pro 512GB MBP.

The M1 Pro 512GB MBP had a 3,950 MB/s write speed and a 4,900 read speed. The M2 Pro 512GB MBP had a 3,154 MB/s write speed and a 2,973 read speed (3,950 vs. 3,154 write and 4,900 vs. 2,973 read).

Writes are 20% slower and reads are 40% slower.

https://9to5mac.com/2023/01/24/macbook-pro-ssd-performance-drop/

 

[Onimusha370]

This causes deep sadness

 

[maflynn]

The M1 Pro 512GB MBP had a 3,950 MB/s write speed and a 4,900 read speed. The M2 Pro 512GB MBP had a 3,154 MB/s write speed and a 2,973 read speed (3,950 vs. 3,154 write and 4,900 vs. 2,973 read).

In normal usage would would anyone even notice the speed difference?

 

[David1986H]

In normal usage would would anyone even notice the speed difference?

As far as I know only if your doing file transferring or using a load of swap memory.

If you have plenty of ram and/or 512gb ssd and don't do tons off transferring files to an external ssd than you should be fine.

 

[Onimusha370]

Yeah the swap memory point is the killer for me. If you’re buying a mac on a budget then you’re unlikely to be upgrading the RAM… Still a great product but just seems a shame for what is surely a few $s difference for apple.

 

[David1986H]

Yeah the swap memory point is the killer for me. If you’re buying a mac on a budget then you’re unlikely to be upgrading the RAM… Still a great product but just seems a shame for what is surely a few $s difference for apple.

Im doing a test now on my M1 Pro 16" 512gb / 32gb have a load of tabs open for a couple hours now and using 27gb ram with no memory swap.

 

[stars5]

Is that a 14-inch only issue? how about 16-inch 512G version?

 

[Sagnet]

Is this alone a reason to buy the M1 Pro MBP over the M2 Pro?

 

[iMacDragon]

Is this alone a reason to buy the M1 Pro MBP over the M2 Pro?

Unless you absolutely have a need for the full speed over the other improvements, no.

 

[Onimusha370]

Im doing a test now on my M1 Pro 16" 512gb / 32gb have a load of tabs open for a couple hours now and using 27gb ram with no memory swap.

View attachment 2147733

That’s cause you have 32gb of RAM - I have 8!

 

[David1986H]

That’s cause you have 32gb of RAM - I have 8!

I think I was just trying to make myself feel better about going for the 512 rather then 1tb lol.

Just don't want to have any issues with the 512 being slower but because I went for 32gb ram again I should be good.

 

[Chancha]

I think I was just trying to make myself feel better about going for the 512 rather then 1tb lol.

Just don't want to have any issues with the 512 being slower but because I went for 32gb ram again I should be good.

And your MBP is a 2021, even with 512GB it uses 4 NANDs of 128GB so no speed drop.

 

[james2538]

don't do tons off transferring files to an external ssd than you should be fine.

You’d also need to be transferring to multiple external drives simultaneously or a single drive that’s faster than 3000 MB/s for it to make a difference (of which not many on the market are).

 

[james2538]

Is that a 14-inch only issue? how about 16-inch 512G version?

There’s about a 90% chance this also applies to the 16-inch 512GB. They used the same chips last generation and very likely do this one as well.

 

[lambertjohn]

In normal usage would would anyone even notice the speed difference?

No.

 

[maflynn]

I said this in the other thread about slower SSD, I think the motivation behind the cheaper components is what is troubling. Apple is a premium brand and now they're cutting corners just to protect their profit margins? Where will it stop? Companies in the past did that, and it never seemed to work out for them.

Also, people bent over backwards to highlight, promote and gloat and how great Apple is by providing extremely fast SSDs, at a time when their competition was unable too. Now they're using slower SSDs, I think its fair game to call them out for such a move.

 

[Sagnet]

Now they're using slower SSDs, I think its fair game to call them out for such a move.

It's not slower SSDs per se, is it? They're just larger and fewer chips.

 

[maflynn]

It's not slower SSDs per se, is it? They're just larger and fewer chips.

In my book, If it takes longer to complete a file operation, then the SSD is slower. Its immaterial at what caused the slowness

 

[AlixSPQR]

In normal usage would would anyone even notice the speed difference?

So Apple made a really bad decision with the M1 SSD's?

 

[usagora]

I said this in the other thread about slower SSD, I think the motivation behind the cheaper components is what is troubling. Apple is a premium brand and now they're cutting corners just to protect their profit margins? Where will it stop? Companies in the past did that, and it never seemed to work out for them.

Also, people bent over backwards to highlight, promote and gloat and how great Apple is by providing extremely fast SSDs, at a time when their competition was unable too. Now they're using slower SSDs, I think its fair game to call them out for such a move.

"Cutting corners" implies that the choice is going to negatively impact users, yet your first post asked an important question, that I took to be rhetorical: will most users even notice a difference? If not, then I don't care what their motivation is or how much the part cost them. If it gets the job done, then that's what matters.

 

[usagora]

Many seem to be noticing as its making the rounds here and else where.

You're right, so why not just buy a cheap windows machine, it will get the job done, that's what matters

We've heard how for many people say time is money, and how many of the benchmarks apple uses to show tasks on the M1 based Macs are done faster and less power then a PC and that's what is important. Now with some SSD configurations those jobs will get done slower then their older M1 counterparts.

I'm less concerned about the seconds or even minutes lost, but rather the move to use inferior products, and a slower ssd is inferior because we kept saying how superior Apple's SSDs were for years. You can't have it both ways, if its fast, and superior, then a slower drive will no longer be superior.

I was actually paraphrasing your own question ("In normal usage would would anyone even notice the speed difference?"). You seemed to be implying they wouldn't, but I guess I was mistaken that your question was rhetorical. I don't count running benchmarks as normal usage. I count transferring files and thinking, "Hmm, this seems like it's taking longer than my older Mac" as normal usage. If people are experiencing that naturally (not convincing themselves it's noticeably slower because they ran a benchmark and then experiencing confirmation bias), then fair enough.

Why not just buy a cheap Windows machine? Because now you're talking about changing the entire operating system, not simply an SSD. Apples and oranges. Most people would definitely notice a difference between the two operating systems.

 

[hoodlum90]

Max Tech posted a comparison of the base M1 vs base M2 14” MacBook Pro this morning and found less than a 5% improvement for Adobe photo and video apps for the M2. Based on previous test we should have seen a 20-30% improvement. He noticed SSD swapping during these tests and thinks the slower SSD in the M2 could be offsetting the faster CPU/GPU. He will be testing a 14” M2 MacBook Pro with additional SSD to see if that is the reason.

 

[Chancha]

Max Tech posted a comparison of the base M1 vs base M2 14” MacBook Pro this morning and found less than a 5% improvement for Adobe photo and video apps for the M2. Based on previous test we should have seen a 20-30% improvement. He noticed SSD swapping during these tests and thinks the slower SSD in the M2 could be offsetting the faster CPU/GPU. He will be testing a 14” M2 MacBook Pro with additional SSD to see if that is the reason.

It is almost certainly the reason. LR CC has been scaling very linearly with all Apple Silicon Macs, to the point that the M1 Ultra actually does get exactly double performance compared to M1 Max in CPU bound tasks in LR.

 

[257Loner]

At the risk of sounding obvious, the most logical response would be to purchase the 1TB model if one required the fastest storage speeds.

 

[lavrishevo]

Exactly what I did, ordered the 30 core, 1tb / 64 gb model. Should be a great improvement over my 2018 i9 / 512 / 32 gb.