Is 768gb flash going to be faster than 512 one?

Discussion in 'MacBook Pro' started by conandoyle, Jun 26, 2012.

  1. conandoyle macrumors member

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2012
    Location:
    Vancouver, Maple Leaf
    #1
    I am just curious about this. Usually, higher capacity has higher performance in ssd. Is it same for flash?
     
  2. brand macrumors 601

    brand

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2006
    Location:
    127.0.0.1
    #2
    Um, the drive in the MBPr is solid state. I think you might be confused.
     
  3. lord patton macrumors 65816

    lord patton

    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2005
    Location:
    Chicago
    #3
    From the reviews I've read at anandtech, there's a considerable jump in performance when going from 120 to 240. Above 240 though, there's not much marginal improvement IIRC.

    That's in general. The rMBP could be different, but I doubt it.
     
  4. Dammit Cubs macrumors 68000

    Dammit Cubs

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2007
    #4
    No. Unless. they have put more flash in parallel on the board to increase data throughput. But I highly doubt they went to those lengths.

    It's just additional storage space. It doesn't act like a hard drive (HDD) where some parts of the device are farther away thus making it slower.
     
  5. MikhailT macrumors 601

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2007
    #5
    Nope, he is not. The bigger the SSD, the more channels it is likely to come in (separate NAND packages going through its own line to the same controller) and the more you can pipeline those channels into the same controller.

    So the more NANDs you have, the faster you can read and write data through because you can parallelize all of those NANDs dies into the same controller.

    I don't think 512GB and 768GB is going to be a huge jump in speed because there's a limit to how much you can pipe into the same controller. You need a much bigger controller to handle more channels before you can see more speed. I doubt rMBP has those types since it's space-constrained and on a custom smaller package.
     
  6. Asherpotter macrumors member

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2012
    #6
    He is confused actually, because he thinks that Apple labeling their drives as "Flash" means they aren't SSD's.
     
  7. photosaurus, Jun 26, 2012
    Last edited: Jun 26, 2012

    photosaurus macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2012
    #7
    From apple.com feature list for the rMBP. Confusing apples with... er... apples.
     

    Attached Files:

  8. Jamesesesesess macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Nov 26, 2011
    #8
    What does that prove? :confused:

    Apple is just calling it 'Flash' so that people will think 'oooh, flash! That must be really fast!'

    Flash = SSD
     
  9. photosaurus macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2012
    #9
    It proves that an Apple is an Orange?

    IDK... I'm just trying to make the OP feel better.
     
  10. MikhailT macrumors 601

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2007
    #10
    Oh, I skimmed through the first post too fast. Now, I got it.

    OP: Apple's all flash storage just means custom SSD system, it's the same thing as having an SSD but it has a different connector.

    The OP is confused because Apple's calling their SSD setup as "all-flash storage" as in Flash != SSD but they're both the same.
     
  11. Jamesesesesess macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Nov 26, 2011
    #11
    [​IMG]
     
  12. jav6454 macrumors P6

    jav6454

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2007
    Location:
    1 Geostationary Tower Plaza
    #12
    There is a speed boost with higher capacity. However, the speed boost is not in the read capacity, but the write capacity.

    More parallel NAND flash modules mean faster write speeds.
     
  13. jcpb macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2012
    #13
    I think the 768GB version is already being limited by the controller (not enough channels) and then further limited by the storage interface, thus the overall performance gain over 512GB is going to be negligible.

    We need to move from SATA3 to PCIe (reportedly the next SATA revision would communicate through PCIe) before we'll see any performance increases past 550MB/s.
     
  14. conandoyle thread starter macrumors member

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2012
    Location:
    Vancouver, Maple Leaf
    #14
    Well, I knew it functions just like ssd, but it certainly does not look like normal 2.5' ssd that you can swap it out and in according to the early tear down .
     
  15. doh123 macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2009
    #15
    the best way to explain it...

    if you open up a SSD, it has the same type of Flash chips in it that Apple uses.

    its not that Apple's flash memory is a SSD, its that a SSD uses the same Flash memory.
     

Share This Page