apple should just introduce the terms of their extended programs during product launches at this point, since there is one for every product anyway.
It doesn’t render the entire machine useless though does it, just the logic board.
Trouble in paradise 😂
Over the past week, some M1 Mac users have been reporting alarming SSD health readings, suggesting that these devices are writing extraordinary amounts of data to their drives (via iMore).
Across Twitter and the MacRumors forums, users are reporting that M1 Macs are experiencing extremely high drive writes over a short space of time. In what appear to be the most severe cases, M1 Macs are said to be consuming as much as 10 to 13 percent of the maximum warrantable total bytes written (TBW) value of its SSD.
Flash memory on solid-state drives, such as those used in Macs, can only be written to a certain number of times before they become unstable. Software ensures that load is spread evenly across the drive's memory cells, but there is a point when the drive has been written to so many times that it can no longer reliably hold data. So while SSD wear is normal, expected behavior, drives should not be exhausting their ability to hold data as quickly as some M1 Macs seem to be.
One user showed that their M1 Mac had already consumed one percent of its SSD after just two months, while another M1 Mac with a 2TB SSD had already consumed three percent. The total data units written for these machines is running into many terabytes, when they would normally be expected to be considerably lower.
The user with three percent usage speculated that, were his machine a 256GB model, it could have used as much as 30 percent to date, and have reached maximum TBW in around two years. An SSD can continue to function once its TBW limit has been reached, but there is no knowing how long it will last past this point.
It is not known how widespread the TBW issue is, but reports of strange SSD behavior are also now emerging from users with Intel-based Macs, suggesting that the TBW issue may not be exclusive to M1 Macs.
The reported wear is so extreme on some M1 Macs that it suggests the problem is due to a bug rather than the expected behavior of the M1 chip, but it is unclear if the problem pertains to erroneous readings or macOS genuinely writing vast amounts of data to the drive. Drive monitoring tools are sometimes unreliable and it is likely that the issue can be fixed via an update to macOS Big Sur.
Article Link: M1 Mac Users Report Excessive SSD Wear
That never made sense to me.But we kept hearing that the M1's ram utilization isn't the same as Intel. I've seen people justify 8GB on the M1 is the same as 16 and even 32GB on intel
SMART/Health Information (NVMe Log 0x02)
Critical Warning: 0x00
Temperature: 38 Celsius
Available Spare: 100%
Available Spare Threshold: 99%
Percentage Used: 0%
Data Units Read: 109,560,966 [56.0 TB]
Data Units Written: 40,077,917 [20.5 TB]
Host Read Commands: 3,010,138,630
Host Write Commands: 299,429,682
Controller Busy Time: 0
Power Cycles: 99
Power On Hours: 562
Unsafe Shutdowns: 20
Media and Data Integrity Errors: 0
Error Information Log Entries: 0SMART/Health Information (NVMe Log 0x02)
Critical Warning: 0x00
Temperature: 25 Celsius
Available Spare: 100%
Available Spare Threshold: 99%
Percentage Used: 0%
Data Units Read: 90,182,304 [46.1 TB]
Data Units Written: 70,803,287 [36.2 TB]
Host Read Commands: 4,062,143,503
Host Write Commands: 1,297,133,342
Controller Busy Time: 0
Power Cycles: 250
Power On Hours: 1,488
Unsafe Shutdowns: 61
Media and Data Integrity Errors: 0
Error Information Log Entries: 0
it's mainly reading your library to analyse content (find faces and scenes).
Sorry I have to disagree. I think the advice for RAM hasn't changed since the 80's. Don't get the bare minimum unless you have to. Bump it up 1) for future proofing 2) Yes to prevent swap (because it a) hurts performance, less so today, and b) wear, more of a problem today).
ehh semantics but technically correct. i imagine for most a logic-board replacement just ends up being a new machine. the cost of a new logic-board (if you can easily find one depending on the age of the machine) plus installation (assuming you're out of warranty) is likely pushing the cost of something new.
I could be wrong, but I believe that they are not traditional SSD's but RAM chips on a main board...Anybody know if I and wrong?
First thing that came to my mind too. I sincerely doubt that this is a “bug” that can be fixed with an OS tweak. Rather, it is a feature of a hardware design decision that affects people whose workflow saturates available RAM limitation of the current crop of M1 Macs and that the OS compensates for by regularly using SSD to compensate.
Folks who made a connection between the M1 and the swap behavior has no understanding of whats going on , they will be vocal however.
Future proofing is marketing speak , if the baseline for the M1 machines came in at 16GB , would you go for 32 ? Just because 16 is the bare minimum they sell?
That's a hard question to answer. It's yes & no depending on your usage. If you have 4/8GB RAM but do things that you should have more RAM with, then technically it could happen also on Intel because of Virtual Ram and swapping. But we don't know the lifespan of Apple SSD's either tho.
