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.
2017 27" iMac SSD Speeds
- Thread starter just!ns
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I thought the 15" MacBook Pro had 3GB speeds, disappointed this doesn't.
ArsTechnica got almost 3 GB/s read. It probably depends on SSD size and the file size you're reading.
https://arstechnica.com/apple/2017/...f-high-end-imac-performance-from-2012-to-now/
https://arstechnica.com/apple/2017/...f-high-end-imac-performance-from-2012-to-now/
Up to; it's difficult to fully saturate it so it's unlikely you'll get the full banana at any given point. However Flash chips on the Macs work in parallel so the larger the storage, the quicker the speeds.
Generally if you're looking for something close to the quoted speeds you'll need the 1TB.
Would there be a significant difference between 512 GB and 1 TB? I mean significant in the sense that the latter would postpone the need to upgrade down the line?
Humbly, Ylan
Ehh well 512GB is still a best of a performer. The only thing I can think of with regards to longevity would be the storage space; more storage means less need to use external storage.
Otherwise the 512GB is still an absolute beast, so feel free to get what you feel is best.
Exact same spec'd iMac I am getting very similar 2000 write and 2350 read. I'll take it.
Ehh well 512GB is still a best of a performer. The only thing I can think of with regards to longevity would be the storage space; more storage means less need to use external storage.
Otherwise the 512GB is still an absolute beast, so feel free to get what you feel is best.
I am conflicted between the 256 and 512. I am not concerned so much about storage space as I will be purchasing an external drive in the near future for my bigger files. I was more concerned with whether I would see a huge speed difference in everyday tasks. Opening apps, web browsing and stuff like that. Thank guys!!
Also if anyone has any benchmarks on the 256 that would be great!!
Ehh well 512GB is still a best of a performer. The only thing I can think of with regards to longevity would be the storage space; more storage means less need to use external storage.
Otherwise the 512GB is still an absolute beast, so feel free to get what you feel is best.
If money was not an issue, 2 TB would be best. It is however, regrettably an issue.
Humbly, Ylan
If money was not an issue, 2 TB would be best. It is however, regrettably an issue.
Humbly, Ylan
It's okay though, 512 is still an utter screamer. You won't have any performance issues.
Really? plan to order 512G SSD instead of 256G SSD just for $250 more. Looks worth it.
Y'all are absolutely terrible for my pocketbook. I just cancelled the order with the 3TB Fusion for a 1TB SSD. I'd have gone 512GB and saved a few hundred, but the wait time was nearly a month longer.
But once I realized the fastest external SSD I was going to be able to put on it was a fraction of the speed for more money, more hassle, and more risk and heat from the Fusion Drive...getting a maxed i7 with the Fusion just seemed too much like putting Prius tires on a Corvette. Luckily my wife understood that argument too!
But once I realized the fastest external SSD I was going to be able to put on it was a fraction of the speed for more money, more hassle, and more risk and heat from the Fusion Drive...getting a maxed i7 with the Fusion just seemed too much like putting Prius tires on a Corvette. Luckily my wife understood that argument too!
Yes but its not so much a problem anymore. The issue was NAND was accessed in parallel and to increase capacity more NAND chips were added so larger capacity SSDs tended to be faster.
Now with various chip capacities, layers, types, etc etc most name brand name manufactures have fairly close performance regardless of capacity. Samsung 850 EVO (SATA SSD) varies by around 5mbps between 120gb, 250gb, 500gb, 1tb and 2tb. There 960 PRO (PCIe SSD) are similar as well.
There was a time moving from 128gb to 256gb could literally double performance. And you can still see that in some SSDs now. The new problem is since the tech has developed and everyone has them the cheapest wins, so now you can find speeds all over the place and larger SSDs (same brand and model) being slower than their smaller counterparts. Just for example the Adata SX8000 512gb SSD has a read speed of around 1200mbs, the 256gb version is over 1400mbs.
Last edited:
Join us. The 2017 iMac is calling your name. One of us... one of us...Well thats beating my 283 write and 446 read on a 256 GB 2012 MacBook Air
I didn't realize the 512gb disks were on back-order, I think I would rather pay more to get the machine sooner in that case :/
You get the same killer SSD speeds in the MacBook Pro now too. Even my 256 GB MacBook 2017 has write speeds well over 1000 MB/s.Join us. The 2017 iMac is calling your name. One of us... one of us...
i7, 1TB, 40GB RAM
2016MB/s write, 2352MB/s read
Originally was going to get only the 512, then looked at the Time Machine drive that was going to be migrated and it was 300+GBs, worrying about not enough headroom for foreseeable future and pulled the trigger. 1TB option is pricy, but well worth it if you need it.
2016MB/s write, 2352MB/s read
Originally was going to get only the 512, then looked at the Time Machine drive that was going to be migrated and it was 300+GBs, worrying about not enough headroom for foreseeable future and pulled the trigger. 1TB option is pricy, but well worth it if you need it.