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.
2018 MacBook Pro Features 'Fastest SSD Ever' in a Laptop According to Benchmarks
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
mr.anthonyramos
macrumors 6502a
Yup “better” specs until you turn on the windows machine and you get hit by how terrible Windows 10 is. Earlier this year, I made a sudden “comeback” to Windows and boy boy was I disappointed.
The only thing important for me is how fast I can transfer pics from my SD cards. Until I can my hands on a new MBP, only then will I be impressed or not.
TimmeyCook
Suspended
Just at the comment section here!
And BTW, nice game they used to "test" the GPU's just to give the advantage to Windows machines and make the Mac look bad.
They chose a shoddy Mac port from 2011, that running DirectX emulated through OpenGL, versus updated native DirectX graphics, nice, such a crappy move, you can CLEARLY see in the bottom that they are sponsored by Huawei, so they had to make the Huawei win.
This is why Apple is moving to Metal, and not looking backwards.
And the "it's because APFS" thing? Last time I checked Windows doesn't have APFS, or something similar, it's not Apple's fault that Microsoft chose to save money and don't develop a modern file system and it's still using NTFS from the 90's. In fact, Microsoft was developing ReFS, and they stopped because... their costumers were not complaining about NTFS.
And not, it's not an APFS clone. Because if it were, it would be even faster, in fact, instant.
Apple's SSD's are that fast, and other guys SSDs are that slow, it's no surprise, the older generation already had a crazy fast SSD:
So, those benchmarks make sense, and it's "a win is a win".
zooole
macrumors member
Yep, it unfortunately does. It also doesn’t help that Apple seemingly has no clue how to handle full screen apps. That resolution is scaled on a 13 inch model, which is essentially more work. The 2x scaling used with the 1280x800 effective resolution provides better performance.
Everything should be solved by giving full control of the screen to the full screen app, but now, if you want to run something in 1440x900, but you set macOS to show as 1650x1050 (cause you want to see more things in Xcode for example), your game will be scaled to 1050 from the native resolution, and since that’s not 2x or 3x, it won’t be pixel perfect, then the game will scale to a 900p because you set the game at that.
It tanks performance. The best way is to use the non-default 1280x800 pixel perfect scaling, or the complete native res without scaling by some third party app.
It’s a ****ing mess, but I’m also pissed that Apple abandoned pixel perfect scaling with the iPhone pluses and the new MacBooks (at least by default).
Ah, ok... I heard there were a few people who aren't aware that it's very important for a computer user to back up their disk from time to time; even regularly. Now I believe it.
TimmeyCook
Suspended
MoJoRo
macrumors member
The laptops support it, but don't come with an option to order it. You have to order and install yourself. From what I've seen, people get up to 1.8GB/s on the XPS 13 with a Samsung 960 Evo, there are some bottlenecks with how the lanes are set up.
TimmeyCook
Suspended
Sponsored by iFixit.
[doublepost=1531528616][/doublepost]
FALSE!
SSD's are not a commodity and Apple makes their own SSD controllers.
NAND chips are a commodity like RAM.
Michael Goff
Suspended
Thanks.
That's a lot of bandwidth. I'm guessing eGPU or monitors? Maybe big storage arrays?
Okay then. I'm going to go see if the Coffee Lake option has nVME.
No, they don't given the slowest benchmark in the chart you provided exceeds the fastest provided in the comparison.Just at the comment section here!
And BTW, nice game they used to "test" the GPU's just to give the advantage to Windows machines and make the Mac look bad.
They chose a shoddy Mac port from 2011, that running DirectX emulated through OpenGL, versus updated native DirectX graphics, nice, such a crappy move, you can CLEARLY see in the bottom that they are sponsored by Huawei, so they had to make the Huawei win.
This is why Apple is moving to Metal, and not looking backwards.
And the "it's because APFS" thing? Last time I checked Windows doesn't have APFS, or something similar, it's not Apple's fault that Microsoft chose to save money and don't develop a modern file system and it's still using NTFS from the 90's. In fact, Microsoft was developing ReFS, and they stopped because... their costumers were not complaining about NTFS.
And not, it's not an APFS clone. Because if it were, it would be even faster, in fact, instant.
Apple's SSD's are that fast, and other guys SSDs are that slow, it's no surprise, the older generation already had a crazy fast SSD:
So, those benchmarks make sense, and it's "a win is a win".
Guy Clark
Suspended
Really? This if you best example of Windows disappointment?
Open paint, open PNG image, choose "Save As", select jpeg as the target format.
They are comparing the Sata 3 SSD setups on the pc laptops to the NVME setup on the Mac. What a ridiculous comparison.
TimmeyCook
Suspended
LOL, that awful quality, that awful workarround, no option to select JPEG quality...
[doublepost=1531529646][/doublepost]
No, you'll be correct assuming Apple can do SSD's.
CarlJ
Contributor
APFS will do "copy on write". When you say "copy file A to B" ... traditionally an OS would (very roughly) do a loop of "copy file A block 1 to file B block 1, copy file A block 2 to file B block 2, ..." (repeating for every block). With copy on write, it can take the list of blocks that make up file A and copy just that block list to the structure for file B, so the two files are sharing the blocks. It also sets a flag for each of the blocks to show that it belongs to both files only until it gets rewritten. This can all happen very quickly, because suddenly your'e copying kilobytes of filesystem data instead of gigabytes of file data. When either file tries to change the contents of any of the shared blocks, the updated file gets a new replacement block, while the old file keeps the previously shared block. Copy on write is very good at saving both disk space and time.
Doing what is intended to be a generalized disk performance/throughput test, and letting this happen (copy on write's non-heavy-lifting version), and then throwing your hands in the air and saying, "a win is a win" is first-rate idiocy. Because making copies of large files isn't the ultimate goal, it's just a stand-in for other filesystem work that actually would change lots of blocks.
Likely the way to do this test properly would be to split the existing SSD into two partitions, and copy a large file from one partition to the other. I don't think APFS will share blocks between filesystems (but I haven't studied the details).
Yup it is. I don't pay for specs per say. I pay for the operating system. I love Mac OS over windows, I love ios over android
I suspect the issue or discrepancy in scores has more to do with software than hardware. Dirt 3 is probably running with directx on Windows while it probably runs with openGL on the mac. I’m pretty confident that with equal hardware, games run much worse with opengl than with directx. It would be nice to find titles that run on vulkan and do benchmarks accross platforms using a single api. Even a metal vs directx comparison would be more valuable.
So dirt-cheap Apple gives you a GPU that's meant for browsing the web, but charges a starting price point that nets you a nice gaming PC and monitor.
I wonder how many FPS the Touchbar gets.
Last edited:
You said it couldn't be done. It can. Obviously you're not very familiar with Windows.
[doublepost=1531531302][/doublepost]
It would be nice if the testers would start by publishing the configurations, including OS versions, used in the comparison.
Michael Goff
Suspended
But the point isn't to inform people, it's to inflame people to get those sweet sweet clicks.
Yeah RIGHT!!!
The GPU test is skewed beyond belief.
If anyone think the HD620 is 2x
better than the Iris Plus 655, is advise you to get your head checked.
These benchmarks reflect OSX vs Windows environments. Either the OSX drivers stink, or the app is poorly coded.
Install Windows on that MBP and check the GPU difference.
Nuff said!
The GPU test is skewed beyond belief.
If anyone think the HD620 is 2x
better than the Iris Plus 655, is advise you to get your head checked.
These benchmarks reflect OSX vs Windows environments. Either the OSX drivers stink, or the app is poorly coded.
Install Windows on that MBP and check the GPU difference.
Nuff said!