Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
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.

Wait a sec... are you seriously telling us that your scientific argument would be that "yes, the speed tests proved that the speed dropped by half (in certain cases), but who cares"?! WTF!
 
I read conflicting info about using that. Some say it rocks, others say it's potentially dangerous

I've been using the enabler on my 2010 17" MBP + 256GB Vertex 4 combo since Aug/2012 with 10.8. Works absolutely great - no problems at all.
 
I read conflicting info about using that. Some say it rocks, others say it's potentially dangerous, others that it isn't needed with a given SSD.
I don't think its dangerous. And it should be enabled for every SSD with TRIM support. TRIM is a command for the OS to tell the SSD controller about deleted blocks, an information otherwise hidden within the filesystem. With this additional information the SSD controller can reduce wear and increase speed.
I put a Samsung 840 EVO 1TB in my 2009 MB. Blackmagic rates it around 260MB/s but normal file operations don't seem to get close.
I have a 2010 MBP with a 250GB Samsung 840. The Mavericks update disabled TRIM and I didn't realize it until the SSD was slow as an HDD. After checking TRIM Enabler my Blackmagic rates tripled. The SSD was full of deleted blocks the controller didn't know about.

Trim Enabler – Do it!
 
Hi, could somebody, who already bought a 2014 model Macbook Air, please repeat the benchmark with TRIM enabled? Download: https://s3.amazonaws.com/groths/TrimEnabler.dmg
Info: http://www.cindori.org/software/trimenabler/

Thanks.

Maybe Apple just did not update their firmware yet and TRIM is still disabled on those new devices? Disabled TRIM could explain those bad results.

Or the drives really are that much worse.. but that would be stupid, from a marketing perspective: Selling models with worse specs than last year..

I hope someony repeats the benchmark with and without TRIM..
 
Disabled TRIM could explain those bad results.
That was a joke. I'm sure TRIM is enabled on all first-party SSDs directly bought from Apple. The difference seems to be the manufacturer Sandisk versus Samsung.

Or the drives really are that much worse.. but that would be stupid, from a marketing perspective: Selling models with worse specs than last year..
That's why they don't talk about it in marketing. All they say is up to 9x faster than a 5400-rpm notebook hard drive. No mentioning of last years SSD speed anywhere. They know performance has decreased and this time the selling point is price. When Broadwell comes, they will return to faster SSDs. I hope.
 
Wait a sec... are you seriously telling us that your scientific argument would be that "yes, the speed tests proved that the speed dropped by half (in certain cases), but who cares"?! WTF!

No, I said the test they did was unscientific. We have no way of knowing if the new laptops are faster or slower, because of the unscientific test. That was my point.
 
The consumer has no day in what SSD is used. So it is an apples to apples comparison.

They are comparing a MBA with newer MBA. This is what the customer is buying, not an SSD.

Customers should expect slower file transfers and poorer performance.

----------



Blackmagic speed test is consistent.

But, they are comparing models of MBA doing things that customers would do. In a real world test, the new MBAs are slower.

No they shouldn't. Consumers should expect to get different performance from others who buy the same product, just as it has been ever since Apple released the all-SSD models in 2010. A customer might have bought a model that had a Sandisk SSD last year and this year got one with a faster Samsung. If there is evidence that Apple is no longer sourcing from Samsung you may have a point, but I haven't seen that claim substantiated.
 
That was a joke. I'm sure TRIM is enabled on all first-party SSDs directly bought from Apple. The difference seems to be the manufacturer Sandisk versus Samsung.

That's why they don't talk about it in marketing. All they say is up to 9x faster than a 5400-rpm notebook hard drive. No mentioning of last years SSD speed anywhere. They know performance has decreased and this time the selling point is price. When Broadwell comes, they will return to faster SSDs. I hope.

No, it's because they use multiple suppliers whose drives have different speeds. This is nothing new. They used to split business between Toshiba and Samsung. Now Sandisk is in the mix. The Samsung drives have generally been faster, but a Apple doesn't like being tied to a single supplier. It's the same with displays. Apple sources from Samsung, LG, and AU Optromics. Each of them have different characteristics.

----------

Wait a sec... are you seriously telling us that your scientific argument would be that "yes, the speed tests proved that the speed dropped by half (in certain cases), but who cares"?! WTF!

No. All it proved are that the Sandisk drives are slower than the Samsung. That was also true in 2013. It just so happened that Macworld's test machine last year had a Samsung and this year has Sandisk and Toshiba drives, which have always been slower. Now, we can fault Apple for using drives from disparate suppliers who have different speeds, but that's nothing new.
 
"Twice as slow"??? I've never heard that sort of English. Does he mean "half as fast"?
 
"Twice as slow"??? I've never heard that sort of English. Does he mean "half as fast"?

No, I think he means twice as slow. Oh wait, it's the same thing and self-explanatory. :rolleyes:

It would be like saying, I never heard of forty-five after, only a quarter till on a clock. There's no difference.
 
No, I think he means twice as slow. Oh wait, it's the same thing and self-explanatory. :rolleyes:

It would be like saying, I never heard of forty-five after, only a quarter till on a clock. There's no difference.

Pessimists :p

we all know the glass is half full not half empty


:cool:
 
There is no true like-for-like comparison. No mention of which manufacturers, for which unit, for each SSD. Even so, SSD speeds are really hard to judge with real world usage. The average person will never even realize these differences, with everyday use.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.