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.
ssd issue again in m2 macbook pro?
- Thread starter steve gee
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Yes, probably the random read speed on that drive is similar. Although swap usage and file transfers will be slower!
I went for the 16" with 512gb 32gb ram, I don't do any file transferring so fingers crossed I should be ok
Congrats on your purchase!
You have a lot of Ram so i am sure you won`t notice it. Either way if your experience is worse than expected don`t be afraid to use the 14 days return window.
Even on the pros ? What the f**k apple ?
Upgrading prices in EU and cutting corners ?
Mbp 14 is 2400€ , 16 is 3000€ lol
And yet they have the insolence to put a single nand?
Upgrading prices in EU and cutting corners ?
Mbp 14 is 2400€ , 16 is 3000€ lol
And yet they have the insolence to put a single nand?
I love how people act like this is anything new. This is why 2 sticks of RAM are faster than 1. This is why RAID can be faster than a single drive. If the top capacity is increased, then the lower capacities must necessarily swap to single modules of storage. It's not like anyone is going to notice the difference between 3950 and 3150. Heck my 860 EVO ssd does 520 and I can barely tell any difference between that and my work M2 970 Pro at 2700.
You’ll never notice that speed difference. Apple had to give and take on some things to improve performance or reliability elsewhere. Going from a spinning disk to a SSD was massive performance jump. Going from 3k to 3800 you won’t notice it at all.
the problem is they managed not to do that on the first gen... this is a cost saving gambit, not a tech problem.
Many people don't know how those chip works, they see lower perf = Apple cheap out on it. Single vs Dual channels, as for RAM. Dual channels will always be faster.
This is why I opt for 1TB SSD on my MacBook Pro 14.
Do we know of a reviewer that has already tested the 1TB?
It's technically still dual channel (256GB x2), just no longer quad channel (128GB x4). Probably why it is a performance hit but not as big as the MBA which went down to a single chip.
So what does this mean for real world usage? In what scenarios will you notice this? Is this a reason for people to buy an M1 Pro over the M2 Pro (even if prices are the same)?
Hardly anything. Only times you might notice is when you start nearing the RAM limit and swap kicks in, or you’re constantly transferring large files.
If you’re having either of these issues then you probably aren’t getting the base model.
Absolutely not. The additional battery life, faster performance from both single and multi-core applications , Wi-Fi 6E, and HDMI 2.1 completely dwarf any perceived drive performance issue.
It’s also nowhere near the drop in base MacBook Air or Mac Mini SSD speeds because the base Pro still uses a RAID configuration. Just in a 2x 256GB vs 4x 128GB configuration.
Remember that 3000 MB/s for read/write is still screaming fast. It’s roughly double the speed of the SSD in the base Air/Mini and will blow past almost all Windows laptops.
Overall, I’d say this isn’t as big of an issue as it is in the Air and Mini. A bit overblown.
The base model of those only come with 8GB of RAM which means you’re more likely to run into a situation where you’re swapping to the SSD.
Those transferring large files likely need more than 512GB of storage anyways. In addition, the external drive you’re transferring to/from also need to support these speeds or greater for it to even make a difference. So a USB 4 or Thunderbolt SSD.
This also might not necessarily be a cost cutting issue. Don’t forget these Pros were significantly delayed due to supply chain issues. It’s possible Apple just couldn’t get their hands on 128GB NAND chips anymore.
The base model of those only come with 8GB of RAM which means you’re more likely to run into a situation where you’re swapping to the SSD.
Those transferring large files likely need more than 512GB of storage anyways. In addition, the external drive you’re transferring to/from also need to support these speeds or greater for it to even make a difference. So a USB 4 or Thunderbolt SSD.
This also might not necessarily be a cost cutting issue. Don’t forget these Pros were significantly delayed due to supply chain issues. It’s possible Apple just couldn’t get their hands on 128GB NAND chips anymore.
Last edited:
Out of curiosity I looked at some of the measured speeds on the new 256 GB internal SSDs and then looked up the speeds of my old-ish SATA SSDs. It looks like mine are listed at about a quarter of the write speed those new ones reach (depending on the test - I couldn’t find a 1:1 comparison).
When I (a relatively recent Windows to Mac convert) used those SATA SSDs as internal drives for Windows computers, I already thought they were pretty damn fast. I sold the last computer that used one of those SATA SSDs last year and the SSDs have since been relegated to external backup drive duties.
This doesn’t mean that the situation isn’t… unfortunate, of course.
I do wish there was some information as to why Apple went this way. Supply chain issues? Suppliers don’t produce 128 GB chips anymore? Cost cutting?
You won’t notice it at all. It’s all benchmark stuff and people will whine about it.