Disk Speed Bench, Macbook Pro mid 2017 15 '' TB 256 SSD

jsangil

macrumors newbie
Original poster
Jul 1, 2017
7
0
Hi. First of all, I am new in this forum, so...greetings from Spain. Of course, I apologize for my bad English.

I'm doing disk speed tests on my Macbook Pro mid 2017 15 '' TB with 256 SSD (KL Processor) and I'm a bit disappointed. I am looking for possible becnhmaks with this same disk capacity but I can not find it.

Anyone with this same model and disk capacity, could tell me the speed of your disk?

Thanks and best regards.
 

Attachments

keysofanxiety

macrumors G3
Nov 23, 2011
9,537
25,262
Speeds are fine. For quicker write speeds you'll need a larger SSD as the Flash chips work in parallel.

Read speeds are more important. At 2.2GB/s that's insanely fast.
 
  • Like
Reactions: jsangil and ZapNZs

Waski

macrumors newbie
Jun 22, 2013
12
1
I have exactly the same results and the answer for this can be in this video:
This guy also got lower results on blackmagic hard drive test and then use a different benchmark to get correct results.

According to Apple 2017 macbook pro should achieve something around 3100 Read and 2200 Write.

Unfortunately I don't have this second benchmark test to check this out, so could anyone confirm this?
 

New_Mac_Smell

macrumors 68000
Oct 17, 2016
1,928
1,546
Shanghai
I have exactly the same results and the answer for this can be in this video:
This guy also got lower results on blackmagic hard drive test and then use a different benchmark to get correct results.

According to Apple 2017 macbook pro should achieve something around 3100 Read and 2200 Write.

Unfortunately I don't have this second benchmark test to check this out, so could anyone confirm this?
It's actually 3200R/2200W, but if you look, according to Apple it is "Up to 3200 Read / 2200 Write*", clearly stating that these were achieved under lab conditions for a top end 15" with 2TB drive (Always read in full).

Don't be getting a base model and expecting it to perform as equally well as the top end, as others have pointed out it's to do with SSDs, the bigger the faster really. The SSD speeds on the whole are lightning fast however, you're still 10x faster than consumer grade ones.
 

ZapNZs

macrumors 68020
Jan 23, 2017
2,310
1,155
Don't be sad! Be glad!

The only thing we can say for certain is that your SSD is really fast, and that the write speeds you are getting in the (specific) Blackmagic App for an SSD of your size is NOT unusual.



Note that my knowledge here is limited - someone smarter than me could correct me if I make a mistake or further elaborate if they care to.

Different benchmarks of the same SSD can show very different results (this example shows the difference between the benchmarks of the 256 GB MBP nTB using Blackmagic vs. QuickBench.) Simple things like the size of the SSD (larger sizes = higher write speeds, usually), to the size of the transfer files, to the amount of free space on the SSD, to the programs running in the background, to the (recovery) pauses in test intervals, to whether or not indexing is enabled or not (as the OS may try to index the test file), to the compressibility of the data can have a significant impact on outcome - then there's the technical variables such as the workload's IO intensity and the testing's queue depth, to which my own understanding is limited-at-best.

To my understanding, Blackmagic uses incompressible data. I do not believe it tests across multiple transfer sizes - even though this can hugely affect measured performance:

960 Pro


This carries significant real-world implications given how much one's personal workload could be oriented in one direction (while at the same time all Users [and their Apps/OS] use heterogeneous file sizes, to some extent.) To me, this limits most of the generalizability of the test, and makes it more of a fun novelty than anything else.

You could try running your own benchmarks based on your own usage. For example, I have my own benchmark folder, which contains four different types of file sizes totaling about 30 GB of many very small Excel/Word/Visio documents, many small AACs and JPEGs, some medium-sized datasets/visualization outputs, and several large video files and datasets. Essentially, these mimic some of the files I work with daily, and I can time how long it takes the very small/small/medium/large file sets individually, or as a whole, and compare the results of one SSD to another to determine how this affects my real-world performance. The transfer speeds of the many small files is dramatically slower than the large files (think like 1/100th the performance!)
 

Painter2002

macrumors 65816
May 9, 2017
1,088
771
Austin, TX
I and I am shopping for laptop another 7 monthes later))
So what are the random read speeds of the new TB macbook pros 2018?
I don’t have a 2018, but for better feedback which storage size are you looking for? The smaller sizes (256-500gb) have significantly different speeds than what the 1TB and larger storage models.
 

axd1152

macrumors member
Sep 22, 2016
41
2
I don’t have a 2018, but for better feedback which storage size are you looking for? The smaller sizes (256-500gb) have significantly different speeds than what the 1TB and larger storage models.
I am looking at 256GB one. I believe that the speed could be significantly different for normal sequential read/write speed, but random reads should not be significantly different.
 

IngerMan

macrumors 68000
Feb 21, 2011
1,601
549
Michigan
Thanks, but there are no random read speeds unfortunately in any of the threads
This is a 2017 15" 500GB. A 1TB has even faster speeds from post I have seen. I would expect the speeds to be close to the same on the 2018. Perhaps the 2018 would only be better but not worse.


iDisk Mark 2017 MBP 15" 500GB.png
 
Last edited:

robvas

macrumors 68040
Mar 29, 2009
3,053
517
USA
Here are my 2016, 17, and 18 models compared. 256 vs 512 is a big jump in write speed

 

axd1152

macrumors member
Sep 22, 2016
41
2
This is a 2017 15" 500GB. A 1TB has even faster speeds from post I have seen. I would expect the speeds to be close to the same on the 2018. Perhaps the 2018 would only be better but not worse.
View attachment 801149
Thank you very much, man! Looks like random read speed haven't been increased in last 8 years. I had 80gb intel ssd back then, which had random read speed of about 55MB/s, and sequential was about 250MB/s. So, in all these years, only sequential speeds have increased substantially. Kinda disappointed now(
[doublepost=1541353463][/doublepost]
Here are my 2016, 17, and 18 models compared. 256 vs 512 is a big jump in write speed

Can you check the random read speeds for the 2018?
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.