Register FAQ / Rules Forum Spy Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
Go Back   MacRumors Forums > News and Article Discussion > MacRumors.com News Discussion

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old May 2, 2014, 01:55 PM   #1
MacRumors
macrumors bot
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
2014 MacBook Airs Demonstrating Slower Flash Storage Speeds Than 2013 Models




The newly released 2014 MacBook Airs are seeing improved processor performance thanks to updated Haswell chips, but storage performance appears to have declined.

In a series of performance benchmark tests performed by Macworld, tests of the flash storage suggested the new MacBook Airs are performing slower than the 2013 MacBook Airs. The comparison, which included a 2013 11-inch MacBook Air with a 256GB SSD and a 2013 13-inch MacBook Air with a 128GB SSD vs. a 2014 11-inch model with a 128GB SSD and a 13-inch model with a 256GB SSD, found that the 2014 models were twice as slow as the 2013 models at some tasks.
Quote:
Copying 6GB of files and folders took 28 seconds on last year's 11-inch MacBook Air, but took nearly twice as long (54 seconds) on this year's 11-inch model. With solid-state storage, lower capacity drives are often slower performers, and last year's 11-inch had the higher capacity 256GB of flash. However, the new 11-inch model was also slower than last year's 13-inch model with 128GB of flash storage.
Compressing 6GB of files also took longer on the 2014 MacBook Air, and Macworld described unzipping as "just plain slow" with the new 11-inch version taking three times as long to unzip files as the 2013 model.

Using fewer but larger files, the performance difference narrowed between the two models, but the 2014 11-inch MacBook Air still performed 35 percent slower copying files than the mid-2013 13-inch MacBook Air with the same storage capacity and 53 percent slower when uncompressing files.

The Blackmagic Disk Speed Test also showed the new models running slower than the older models, with write/read speeds as follows (in MBps):

- 2013 13-inch with 128GB SSD: 445/725
- 2013 11-inch with 256GB SSD: 687/725
- 2014 13-inch with 256GB SSD: 520/676
- 2014 11-inch with 128GB SSD: 306/620

All four of the drives in the MacBook Airs tested came from different manufacturers, with two from Samsung, one from Toshiba, and one from SanDisk, which accounts for the performance discrepancies. Speed differences between SSDs used within Apple's MacBook Air computers have been highlighted before in previous models and as suggested in the past, while the speed variations may be noticeable in some high-intensity tasks, they are unlikely to be noticed during day-to-day usage.

Released earlier this week, the new MacBook Airs are available from Apple's website beginning at $899.

Article Link: 2014 MacBook Airs Demonstrating Slower Flash Storage Speeds Than 2013 Models
MacRumors is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old May 2, 2014, 01:57 PM   #2
PBF
macrumors 68030
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: NYC
Hope it doesn't mean that iPhone 6 will be slower than iPhone 5.
PBF is offline   13 Reply With Quote
Old May 2, 2014, 01:58 PM   #3
okboy
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
There was a high failure rate with some past SSD's. I'm glad they're trying others. Better slower speeds and better reliability.
okboy is offline   4 Reply With Quote
Old May 2, 2014, 01:59 PM   #4
Stickrbox
macrumors newbie
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
And this is probably where they shaved $100 from
Stickrbox is offline   61 Reply With Quote
Old May 2, 2014, 01:59 PM   #5
MartinAppleGuy
macrumors 65816
 
MartinAppleGuy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Well that's...em...awkward :P
__________________
2014 Highest End 21.5" iMac, 2.9 - 3.6Ghz i5, 8GB RAM, 1TB HDD, Nvidia GeForce GT 750m w/ 1GB GDDR5 VRAM
MartinAppleGuy is offline   17 Reply With Quote
Old May 2, 2014, 01:59 PM   #6
LordVic
macrumors 65816
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Ontario
um...

am I the only one who is seeing some serious faulty testing going on here?

there doesn't seem to be a like to like test.

going to have to see better and more detailed working of their testing environment and setup.

the two 11"'s tested did not have the same storage SSD's. We all know that there's a density difference and performance with different sized SSD's

then they compared 13" to 11" models, that have other factors as well.

Plus, they're not really giving scientific backing. Just copying files isn't really a good indicator of the real speed. I want to see some actual benchmarks.

Listen, I'm just a skeptic. if you're going to make claims. Back them up
__________________
“We can't win against obsession. They care, we don't. They win.”
― Douglas Adams, Life, the Universe and Everything
LordVic is offline   24 Reply With Quote
Old May 2, 2014, 02:00 PM   #7
KPOM
macrumors G3
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Longtime readers of AnandTech know that Apple SSDs are a crapshoot. It used to be that Toshiba and Samsung provided all the SSDs, with Samsung's significantly faster, particularly with encrypted or compressed data. After the Toshiba failed SSD debacle, it seems Apple is sourcing from others. So what Macworld is doing isn't really an "apples to apples" comparison.
KPOM is offline   4 Reply With Quote
Old May 2, 2014, 02:00 PM   #8
sentiblue
macrumors Demi-God
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Silicon Valley
NOT apple to apple

So if somebody was dedicated enough to get 4 machines to do comparisons...

Why did they not choose the same disk options...

They just had to do 13" 128GB vs 256GB and then again 11" with 128GB vs 256GB
sentiblue is offline   7 Reply With Quote
Old May 2, 2014, 02:00 PM   #9
William Gates
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
OS X 10.9.3 here we come.
__________________
iPhone 5 | iPad 3rd gen | 2011 Mac Mini | 2011 13" MacBook Air | Apple TV 2nd gen | Apple TV 3rd gen
William Gates is offline   2 Reply With Quote
Old May 2, 2014, 02:01 PM   #10
JoEw
macrumors 6502a
 
JoEw's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Hopefully apple comments on this, otherwise.. it appears Apple just kept their margin from that 100 dollar cut.
__________________
Late 2009 27" iMac, i5, iPhone 5 32GB Black, 13" Macbook Air, i7, 8GB RAM, 256GB SSD, TV 3rd Generation iPod Nano iPad Air 32GB White
JoEw is offline   10 Reply With Quote
Old May 2, 2014, 02:01 PM   #11
Rudy69
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
That's a pretty big decrease :/
Rudy69 is offline   5 Reply With Quote
Old May 2, 2014, 02:03 PM   #12
RoastingPig
macrumors 65816
 
RoastingPig's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: SoCal
Send a message via AIM to RoastingPig
most of the first models out have that sandisk garbage
__________________
Mac Pro 6 Core D700*, Retina 13 256gb/8gb 5000
RoastingPig is online now   0 Reply With Quote
Old May 2, 2014, 02:04 PM   #13
buckwheet
macrumors newbie
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Yipes! This is pretty bad, for sure. Maybe dodgy firmware?
buckwheet is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old May 2, 2014, 02:06 PM   #14
Nyy8
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: New England
*Ding Ding*

I just found out how Apple saved $100.

Silly people thinking Apple would cut their margins
__________________
iPad 2 16GB, iPhone 5S Space Grey 16GB,
iMac 21.5 inch, 2.5 GHz Core i5, 4GB RAM, 500GB HD
Nyy8 is offline   13 Reply With Quote
Old May 2, 2014, 02:07 PM   #15
filmbuff
macrumors 6502a
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
This test is so unscientific it's basically worthless. No reason to even bother paying attention to these results.

IF the 2014 models are slower, they're still fast enough that 99.9% of customers will never notice a difference and the other .01% will never be happy.
filmbuff is offline   6 Reply With Quote
Old May 2, 2014, 02:08 PM   #16
WiiDSmoker
macrumors 65816
 
WiiDSmoker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Hermitage, TN
Quote:
Originally Posted by filmbuff View Post
This test is so unscientific it's basically worthless. No reason to even bother paying attention to these results.

IF the 2014 models are slower, they're still fast enough that 99.9% of customers will never notice a difference and the other .01% will never be happy.
Half of write speed is going backwards. Newer models are supposed to be better. Stop trying to make excuses. Apple cheaped out here.
__________________
Windows 7 64 | FreeNAS 30 TB | White iPhone 5 32GB | TV 3 | iPad 3 White 32GB
WiiDSmoker is offline   36 Reply With Quote
Old May 2, 2014, 02:09 PM   #17
buckwheet
macrumors newbie
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rudy69 View Post
That's a pretty big decrease :/
well exactly... Does variance between manufacturers even account for that big a discrepancy? (And yes, I'm genuinely asking.)
buckwheet is offline   3 Reply With Quote
Old May 2, 2014, 02:10 PM   #18
ValSalva
macrumors 68040
 
ValSalva's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Burpelson AFB
I wouldn't be surprised if this was true. But then other 2014 MBA's might be faster.

Apple's Q/A is at its worst on the MBA, especially compared to the MBP. Fit and finish is crap compared to the MBP. The displays are less than third rate too.
ValSalva is offline   2 Reply With Quote
Old May 2, 2014, 02:10 PM   #19
MacSince1990
macrumors 65816
 
MacSince1990's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Oh my GOD, insert care here!
__________________
Beige G3 w/1 GHz Sonnet G4, 768 MB, 400 GB HDD + 2x120GB, Radeon Mac Edition, ATA/133 PCI, 4-Port USB 2 PCI, 18x DVDRW, MacOS 10.4.11
15" Mid 2012 2.7 GHz Hi-Res/AG MBP 16 GB RAM, 1 TB 7200RPM 10.9.2
MacSince1990 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old May 2, 2014, 02:11 PM   #20
Crosscreek
macrumors 6502a
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Margarittaville
Nobody was suppose to test that?
Crosscreek is offline   3 Reply With Quote
Old May 2, 2014, 02:12 PM   #21
MacSince1990
macrumors 65816
 
MacSince1990's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Quote:
Originally Posted by filmbuff View Post
This test is so unscientific it's basically worthless. No reason to even bother paying attention to these results.

IF the 2014 models are slower, they're still fast enough that 99.9% of customers will never notice a difference and the other .01% will never be happy.
Yeah a three-fold increase in time spent on a process isn't noticeable >_>

these aren't unreliable tests at all.

It's probly a driver/firmware issue.
__________________
Beige G3 w/1 GHz Sonnet G4, 768 MB, 400 GB HDD + 2x120GB, Radeon Mac Edition, ATA/133 PCI, 4-Port USB 2 PCI, 18x DVDRW, MacOS 10.4.11
15" Mid 2012 2.7 GHz Hi-Res/AG MBP 16 GB RAM, 1 TB 7200RPM 10.9.2
MacSince1990 is offline   5 Reply With Quote
Old May 2, 2014, 02:14 PM   #22
suprakc
macrumors member
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: Utah
Huh

Honestly couldn't even finish the article there are so many typos. (i.e. the 2013 models are almost twice as slow as the 2013 models?)

And the test is BS.

Getting a 2014 model 13" 256 today.
suprakc is offline   5 Reply With Quote
Old May 2, 2014, 02:15 PM   #23
Gudi
macrumors 6502a
 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: Berlin
Someone forgot to enable Trim Enabler?

Nah, it doesn't matter. Since both miss a Retina screen.
Gudi is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old May 2, 2014, 02:16 PM   #24
pletopia
macrumors newbie
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Don't they realize this is like comparing apples (no pun intended) to oranges?!

If you go buy a flash drive from the same manufacturer even, from the same model series, different capacities have different speed ratings ...

Whether these are are SATA drives or even PCIe drives is irrelevant. This is a review from yesterday. In this case the read speeds are the same across the three capacities but the writes are all different depending on if its 128, 256, or 512

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/...-ssd,3763.html
pletopia is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old May 2, 2014, 02:17 PM   #25
Razeus
macrumors 68040
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Glad I'm going with the refurb 2013 model.

PCI-e isn't all that.
__________________

Website, Pictures & Tweets
Razeus is online now   2 Reply With Quote

Reply
MacRumors Forums > News and Article Discussion > MacRumors.com News Discussion

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Similar Threads
thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Swap mid 2012 flash storage to 2014 MBA? hlkc MacBook Air 3 Feb 15, 2014 11:45 AM
2013 iMac: Faster PCIe Flash Storage ? macdud iMac 21 Nov 19, 2013 03:00 AM
2013 MacPro PCI-e Flash Storage? Lesser Evets Mac Pro 14 Oct 18, 2013 10:12 AM
2013/2014 iMac Models tanker5 iMac 14 Aug 3, 2013 02:46 PM

Forum Jump

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:48 AM.

Mac Rumors | Mac | iPhone | iPhone Game Reviews | iPhone Apps

Mobile Version | Fixed | Fluid | Fluid HD
Copyright 2002-2013, MacRumors.com, LLC