M2 Mac Mini Storage: 256GB vs 512GB single NAND?

[Mity]

Does anyone know if the M2 Mini will have the same single NAND storage chip like the M2 Air? Meaning, if we don't want garbage, we have to upgrade to 512GB?

https://www.theverge.com/23220299/apple-macbook-air-m2-slow-ssd-read-write-speeds-testing-benchmark

Edit:
Benchmarks start on Page 4
Geeks (including me) arguing Pages 1-3

Edit2:
Base M1 & 2018 Intel SSD benchmark: https://forums.macrumors.com/thread...gb-vs-512gb-single-nand.2377687/post-31906521

Base 2023 M2 SSD benchmark: https://forums.macrumors.com/thread...gb-vs-512gb-single-nand.2377687/post-31906314

512GB 2023 M2 (not Pro) SSD benchmark: https://forums.macrumors.com/thread...s.2378187/page-14?post=31908552#post-31908552

Summary:

2018 Intel Write: 1627
2018 Intel Read: 2485

2020 Base M1 Write: 2733
2020 Base M1 Read: 2854

2023 Base M2 Write: 1431
2023 Base M2 Read: 1482

2023 512GB M2 Write: 3417
2023 512GB M2 Read: 2987

 

[tuc]

Does anyone know if the M2 Mini will have the same single NAND storage chip like the M2 Air? Meaning, if we don't want garbage, we have to upgrade to 512GB?

It's a good question. I'm sure we'll find out once people get their hands on them next week.

You would have to think that the M2 Mini with 256gb of storage is likely to have the same issue as the 256gb M2 Air, where the SSD bandwidth is about half that of the 512mb M2 Air.

However I wouldn't call the 256gb M2 Air's SSD bandwidth "garbage". It's no slower than, say, the SSD bandwidth of the 2020 (Intel) Air. But it does make it tempting to pay the $200 to upgrade to 512gb. Not only does that double the size of your SSD, but it also doubles your SSD bandwidth. (I mean, I decided it was worth it to pay for the 512gb upgrade on my son's M1 Air, even though it didn't improve SSD bandwidth at all. Just so he would be able to store more files.)

But we'll have to wait to see if the M2 Mini is like the M2 Air in this regard.

 

[Mity]

It's a good question. I'm sure we'll find out once people get their hands on them next week.

You would have to think that the M2 Mini with 256gb of storage are likely to have the same issue as the 256gb M2 Air, where the SSD bandwidth is about half that of the 512mb M2 Air.

However I wouldn't call the 256gb M2 Air's SSD bandwidth "garbage". It's no slower than, say, the SSD bandwidth of the 2020 (Intel) Air. But it does make it tempting to pay the $200 to upgrade to 512gb. Not only does that double the size of your SSD, but it also doubles your SSD bandwidth. (I mean, I decided it was worth it to pay for the 512gb upgrade on my son's M1 Air, even though it didn't improve SSD bandwidth at all. Just so he would be able to store more files.)

But we'll have to wait to see if the M2 Mini is like the M2 Air in this regard.

What really bothers me is that it's a hidden price increase, just like the lack of a charger included with newer iPhones. IMO there is no reason for the M1 Air to have 2 NAND chips and the M2 Air to have just 1, except to surreptitiously increase margin. It's a very cheap thing to do. And you're right about tempting an upgrade - I bet their goal is to increase ASP to please Wall Street.

 

[DEMinSoCAL]

What really bothers me is that it's a hidden price increase, just like the lack of a charger included with newer iPhones. IMO there is no reason for the M1 Air to have 2 NAND chips and the M2 Air to have just 1, except to surreptitiously increase margin. It's a very cheap thing to do. And you're right about tempting an upgrade - I bet their goal is to increase ASP to please Wall Street.

What's worse is Apple's actual cost to use 2 x 128GB NAND chips instead of 1 x 256GB chip is next to nothing. At their volume of purchasing, what would you think the cost difference is? The system board already has a spot for the chip so to add it costs nothing for the robot machines to manufacture. It's purely the cost difference between 2 smaller chips or one larger chip. All for Apple to boost margins by a buck or two.

 

[chrfr]

What really bothers me is that it's a hidden price increase

It isn't at all a price increase. People who are buying the 256GB Mac mini aren't buying it because it's the best performer.

 

[Heat_Fan89]

It isn't at all a price increase. People who are buying the 256GB Mac mini aren't buying it because it's the best performer.

That is EXACTLY the point. I purchased an M2 Mini 8/256 from the EDU store. I had $60.17 in store credit. I'll get back $16 in Apple Card cashback. With tax included my M2 Mini will cost me around $458. I can deal with a lot for that price.

 

[Heat_Fan89]

What really bothers me is that it's a hidden price increase, just like the lack of a charger included with newer iPhones. IMO there is no reason for the M1 Air to have 2 NAND chips and the M2 Air to have just 1, except to surreptitiously increase margin. It's a very cheap thing to do. And you're right about tempting an upgrade - I bet their goal is to increase ASP to please Wall Street.

It's just upsell and Apple are the Kings when it comes to that. They do that pretty much to their entire product line. I stopped playing the upsell game a long time ago.

 

[racoop]

I'm thinking in the real world, about 99.8% of buyers are unaware of the 2X256 issue, nor care, nor would ever notice. I would be surprised if the few computer dorks that will upgrade to 512 for this reason (which includes this dork) was something on Apple's profit mindset. Of course I do believe Apple carefully structures the upgrade tiers to induce up-spending in general.

 

[Ethosik]

What really bothers me is that it's a hidden price increase

It's not about hiding it behind price increases. Even my 4TB Mac Studio doesn't meet the speeds Apple advertised. However, an 8TB Mac Studio DOES. Each upgrade in SSD provides faster performance. It's just what you should expect. And if you are a pro that needs significantly faster SSD performance than the 256GB can perform, then a BASE SYSTEM is not for you anyway. I am still rocking a 2010 Mac Pro in my workflow for PRO use and its using not only SATA SSDs but its limited by SATA 2 speeds. Works just fine for my professional needs.

 

[Mity]

It isn't at all a price increase. People who are buying the 256GB Mac mini aren't buying it because it's the best performer.

It's not about hiding it behind price increases. Even my 4TB Mac Studio doesn't meet the speeds Apple advertised. However, an 8TB Mac Studio DOES. Each upgrade in SSD provides faster performance. It's just what you should expect. And if you are a pro that needs significantly faster SSD performance than the 256GB can perform, then a BASE SYSTEM is not for you anyway. I am still rocking a 2010 Mac Pro in my workflow for PRO use and its using not only SATA SSDs but its limited by SATA 2 speeds. Works just fine for my professional needs.

Even if you argue that a "pro" user should get the better SSD, then why did the base M1 Air have 2 NAND chips and the newer M2 Air didn't? Because Apple needed a reason to force users to pay more for the 512GB. Either way, via a cost reduction by not including an extra chip or actual upgrade, there was an increase in profit. Total d*ck move.

 

[Mity]

That is EXACTLY the point. I purchased an M2 Mini 8/256 from the EDU store. I had $60.17 in store credit. I'll get back $16 in Apple Card cashback. With tax included my M2 Mini will cost me around $458. I can deal with a lot for that price.

If you're in a position where you're counting dollars and cents, you should be considering a Chromebook or entry level Windows machine. I bought a base M1 Mini for streaming video in my exercise room. If someone were to buy an M2 machine as their primary computer, they should be very concerned about the lack of performance.

It's just upsell and Apple are the Kings when it comes to that. They do that pretty much to their entire product line. I stopped playing the upsell game a long time ago.

It's one thing to charge a lot for upgrades. It's another to rollback performance. Halving the speed for the base M2 over the M1 is a pathetic move.

This is exactly why even in everyday use, the M1 Air can be faster than the M2 Air:

 

[tstafford]

It's BS that Apple made the M2 MBA worse in any way than the M1 MBA. You should count on getting a better machine when you upgrade. And they didn't disclose the change in the SSD performance which is also wrong. Also it's not a trivial issue - a lot of people count on the SSD speed especially in the base machine where it is more likely to use swap memory.

I bought the base unit knowing about this issue. So I got to make an informed decision. For folks who bought right out of the gate, I think this was pretty crappy by Apple.

 

[Ethosik]

Even if you argue that a "pro" user should get the better SSD, then why did the base M1 Air have 2 NAND chips and the newer M2 Air didn't? Because Apple needed a reason to force users to pay more for the 512GB. Either way, via a cost reduction by not including an extra chip or actual upgrade, there was an increase in profit. Total d*ck move.

Nobody buys the MacBook Air for SSD speeds. If you do, you are buying the wrong product. SSD speeds do not matter one bit for the target audience of an Air.

Also, can people stop posting that Max Tech video? It is their worst video ever. There was a giant thread about this when the Air first came out and someone made a VERY good and VERY lengthy post about why the Max Tech video is wrong and their testing strategy is faulty. One of the biggest points is they were testing the 256GB SSD at near full capacity. If you know anything about SSDs, this absolutely KILLS their performance. NEVER EVER run an SSD at close to full capacity. It can sometimes cause it to be slower than a HDD.

 

[Heat_Fan89]

If you're in a position where you're counting dollars and cents, you should be considering a Chromebook or entry level Windows machine. I bought a base M1 Mini for streaming video in my exercise room. If someone were to buy an M2 machine as their primary computer, they should be very concerned about the lack of performance.



It's one thing to charge a lot for upgrades. It's another to rollback performance. Halving the speed for the base M2 over the M1 is a pathetic move.

View attachment 2146302View attachment 2146303
View attachment 2146305

This is exactly why even in everyday use, the M1 Air can be faster than the M2 Air:

I am not concerned about lack of performance, so please don't tell me what computer best fits my needs. Obviously Apple disagrees with you because they are selling a 8/256GB Mini. I chose the base Mini because I am not playing the upsell game. You can if you want. I spend my money wisely. I can put that to good use so I can buy a $4K fully loaded gaming rig from HP. The base Mini is fine for most users. I am now retired and my computing needs are basic. I like macOS and Linux. For gaming it is Windows 100%.

 

[Mity]

Nobody buys the MacBook Air for SSD speeds. If you do, you are buying the wrong product. SSD speeds do not matter one bit for the target audience of an Air.

Also, can people stop posting that Max Tech video? It is their worst video ever. There was a giant thread about this when the Air first came out and someone made a VERY good and VERY lengthy post about why the Max Tech video is wrong and their testing strategy is faulty. One of the biggest points is they were testing the 256GB SSD at near full capacity. If you know anything about SSDs, this absolutely KILLS their performance. NEVER EVER run an SSD at close to full capacity. It can sometimes cause it to be slower than a HDD.

Of course, everyone else is wrong.
MKBHD
Washington Post
PC World
And even Macrumors suggested an upgrade to 512GB if you're storing files on it (who doesn't?). Macrumors only tested web performance and even though the M2 Air was faster, it wasn't enough to show any practical difference (just like WaPo).

 

[Heat_Fan89]

Of course, everyone else is wrong.
MKBHD
Washington Post
PC World
And even Macrumors suggested an upgrade to 512GB if you're storing files on it (who doesn't?). Macrumors only tested web performance and even though the M2 Air was faster, it wasn't enough to show any practical difference (just like WaPo).

Look, this is getting tiring tbh. Buy what you want and move along. I am very happy with my 8/256GB base Mini.

 

[Mity]

Nobody buys the MacBook Air for SSD speeds. If you do, you are buying the wrong product. SSD speeds do not matter one bit for the target audience of an Air.

That is abjectly false. Apple markets the Air as a photo/video editing machine: https://www.apple.com/macbook-air-m2/

But the devil is in details, as usual. Notice the fine print?

3. Testing conducted by Apple in May 2022 using preproduction MacBook Air systems with Apple M2, 8-core CPU, 10-core GPU, and 24GB of RAM, as well as production MacBook Air systems with Apple M1, 8-core CPU, 8-core GPU, and 16GB of RAM, all configured with 2TB SSD, as well as production 1.6GHz dual-core Intel Core i5-based MacBook Air systems with Intel UHD Graphics 617, 16GB of RAM, and 1TB SSD. Final Cut Pro 10.6.2 tested using a complex 2-minute project with 4K ProRes 422 media. Performance tests are conducted using specific computer systems and reflect the approximate performance of MacBook Air.

 

[Mity]

Look, this is getting tiring tbh. Buy what you want and move along. I am very happy with my 8/256GB base Mini.

There are a lot of people like me that don't want a downgrade when they buy a new machine. And quite fairly, I never asked for your opinion on whether a base M2 was better than a base M1. I asked if the new M2 Mini would have 2 NAND chips or 1.

 

[Heat_Fan89]

You don't have to reply to my thread. There are a lot of people like me that don't want a downgrade when they buy a new machine. And quite fairly, I never asked for your opinion on whether a base M2 was better than a base M1. I asked if the new M2 Mini would have 2 NAND chips or 1.

Then don't downgrade and buy what works best for you. You argument is pretty lame at best, especially when you recommend a Chromebook over a Mini. Do you understand how different both products are? Let me help you out here. The Mini runs macOS and the other runs ChromeOS. I can already tell you that the base Mini will run circles around any Netbook or Chromebook. The base Mini at minimum will be several times faster than any internal SSD. I installed an internal SSD in a 2012 Mini and it really quick at everything it is supposed to do. The 2023 Mini will be many times faster than my 2012 Mini.

It is almost like you are doubting your very own purchase and wanting others to agree with you.

 

[gradi]

A few months ago he was telling people the slow M2 MBA 256gb SSD was much ado about nothing. Now he has reversed his opinion after using the M2 MBA 256gb SSD for awhile.

The M2 MacBook Air: I was WRONG!​

Remember when I vigorously defended the base model M2 MacBook Air earlier this year? Well, it turns out I didn’t dig deep enough.

 

[racoop]

This probably boils down to an important issue for about 50 people in the world, a significant percentage of whom are griping about it here 🤣. At least you have the choice to buy whatever configuration you want.

 

[Ethosik]

That is abjectly false. Apple markets the Air as a photo/video editing machine: https://www.apple.com/macbook-air-m2/

View attachment 2146341
View attachment 2146342
View attachment 2146343

But the devil is in details, as usual. Notice the fine print?

3. Testing conducted by Apple in May 2022 using preproduction MacBook Air systems with Apple M2, 8-core CPU, 10-core GPU, and 24GB of RAM, as well as production MacBook Air systems with Apple M1, 8-core CPU, 8-core GPU, and 16GB of RAM, all configured with 2TB SSD, as well as production 1.6GHz dual-core Intel Core i5-based MacBook Air systems with Intel UHD Graphics 617, 16GB of RAM, and 1TB SSD. Final Cut Pro 10.6.2 tested using a complex 2-minute project with 4K ProRes 422 media. Performance tests are conducted using specific computer systems and reflect the approximate performance of MacBook Air.

View attachment 2146344

Yes....and? My 2010 Mac Pro with SATA 2 SPEEDS....hint 250MB per second MAX can still do video editing and photoshop work. The horrible horribly slow 1GB/s speeds of the Air will be just fine. Oh my gosh how can anyone EVER do ANY form of video or photo editing even just a few years ago with SATA 3 speeds even. How horrible were SSDs at 500 MB/s at Sata 3 speeds where you were incapable of doing ANY work. How did businesses run in the early 2000s?

Also, you do realize Apple is marketing the capabilities of the system which means MAXED OUT. Who is a heavy video editor or photo editor with only 256GB of SSD? No-one. Just like how Apple markets the Mac Studio having 7GB/s SSD speeds. Do I get that with my 4TB config? No. But an 8TB config does.

 

[gcortesi]

Does anyone know if the M2 Mini will have the same single NAND storage chip like the M2 Air? Meaning, if we don't want garbage, we have to upgrade to 512GB?

https://www.theverge.com/23220299/apple-macbook-air-m2-slow-ssd-read-write-speeds-testing-benchmark

I have the same question. I bought the 512GB M2 MacBook Air instead of the 256GB model and am really happy with it and would like to replace my aging Intel Mac Mini. Guess we’ll know soon when the new Mini ships and testers take it apart.

 

[Mity]

Yes....and? My 2010 Mac Pro with SATA 2 SPEEDS....hint 250MB per second MAX can still do video editing and photoshop work. The horrible horribly slow 1GB/s speeds of the Air will be just fine. Oh my gosh how can anyone EVER do ANY form of video or photo editing even just a few years ago with SATA 3 speeds even. How horrible were SSDs at 500 MB/s at Sata 3 speeds where you were incapable of doing ANY work. How did businesses run in the early 2000s?

Also, you do realize Apple is marketing the capabilities of the system which means MAXED OUT. Who is a heavy video editor or photo editor with only 256GB of SSD? No-one. Just like how Apple markets the Mac Studio having 7GB/s SSD speeds. Do I get that with my 4TB config? No. But an 8TB config does.

What do you mean "Yes...and?" You made a statement about how this computer isn't meant for professional use and I provided evidence via Apple's own marketing about how you're wrong. Apple cherrypicked the results. Look in the battery life test where they quoted the base model. Why do that instead of using the same one for the photo editing test? Because more RAM means more energy usage so Apple switched to the base model. Why not do the photo editing test with the base model?

 

[Mity]

There's no need to ignore you. People can disagree with others. Your argument was not well thought out especially when you base your argument on people who make videos who make claims just to generate cash on YT. The real world will disagree with them. The base M2 Mini will be fine for most. It will be anywhere 2-4 times faster than the best internal SSD.

I'll tell you what. I will post my boot up times from my 2018 Mini which uses very fast internal SSD and the base M2 Mini. My 2012 Mini boots to desktop with an internal SSD in about 50 seconds. That was an improvement from about 1 minute and 12 seconds with a 5400 RPM HDD.

My 2018 Mini with 256GB boots around 18.41 seconds. I will post my boot time with the M2 Mini. I am going to take a guess that the 2018 and 2023 Mini's will be pretty close in real world speeds.

I'm not sure what else to say to you except that you seem to living in your own world and expect everyone to use this machine in the same way that you do. Most people who buy computers are not looking to just websurf. Believe it or not, people still use physical files. That's why Macrumors suggested upgrading:

I think I'm being reasonable with what most people use their computer for and you are not. And even then, how could anyone defend an increase in price for a reduction/same performance?