Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Jeez, this is ugly.

But you can just return it, and state your reason. Personally I find this rather disturbing that the Pro model may be like this. That is a mistake.
 
Last edited:
View attachment 2147628

This review confirms the M2 Pro mini 1TB is with 4 NANDs. The additional performance of the MBPs maybe due to the Max chip being better at handling SSD data links than the Pro chip (we got a thread somewhere here discussing this). The Studio is also on M1 Max but is lower than MBP was thought to do with their use of SSD boards, which are further away from the SoC than if you solder them close.

Do you need to upgrade to the 12-core CPU to get 4 NAND chips or do you also get that with M2 Pro 10-core CPU?
 
What bothers me a lot is that I assume that this reduction in SSD performance is going to have an impact when the system is low on RAM and starts swapping to the SSD? I've been torn about 16GB being enough for me, and with this SSD performance now.. I'm concerned.

I have a M2 Pro base model coming tomorrow.. ha...
 
Do you need to upgrade to the 12-core CPU to get 4 NAND chips or do you also get that with M2 Pro 10-core CPU?
I would make an assumption that the CPU processor makes no difference to the storage. That would be menacing if it were the case.
 
This issue just made macrumors front page news, lol.

And they linked someone already done teardown for M2 Pro mini:

It seems there are 2 NAND chips soldered on each side of the same “space” (board is double sided)
And there are left over *6* NAND space unused, if indeed all 8 can be used on both sides.
 
So is it safe to assume that the M2 Pro Mac Mini 2023 will need a minimum of 1TB storage for the same read/write speeds as the 512GB MacBook Pros?
I will cancel my order once confirmed. This disappoints me greatly.
I planned on ordering a M2 Pro Mini with either 512 or 1TB. If 1TB is the sweet spot, then will order that. Has anyone confirmed it is a lot faster than the 512?
 
What bothers me a lot is that I assume that this reduction in SSD performance is going to have an impact when the system is low on RAM and starts swapping to the SSD? I've been torn about 16GB being enough for me, and with this SSD performance now.. I'm concerned.

I have a M2 Pro base model coming tomorrow.. ha...
It will, in theory. But then whether or not it makes a real world difference for your given task is hard to say. And at least the M2 Pro base having 3400MB/s is a lot higher of a headroom than the M2’s 1500MB/s
 
I planned on ordering a M2 Pro Mini with either 512 or 1TB. If 1TB is the sweet spot, then will order that. Has anyone confirmed it is a lot faster than the 512?
@Chancha replied to this thread with a video linked and screenshots showing that the 1TB M2 Pro Mac Mini has similar read/write speeds to the new M2 MacBook Pro's (6,000 MB/s).
As compared to the base model with 512GB M2 Pro Mac mini (3,000 MB/s).
 
I planned on ordering a M2 Pro Mini with either 512 or 1TB. If 1TB is the sweet spot, then will order that. Has anyone confirmed it is a lot faster than the 512?
It is confirmed. 1TB test results vary from 5000 to 7000MB/s. Just double of the 512GB clearly.
 
Really interesting if the M2 Pro Mac Mini utilizes 4-channel NAND. According to this base M2 Mini tear down, there's only a pair of NAND pin-outs. The board doesn't seem to have space for four NAND chips unless the M2 Pro Mini has a different board/layout. Hope someone can post an M2 Pro tear down soon, I may need to modify my order.

tempsnip.jpg
 
Last edited:
Really interesting if the M2 Pro Mac Mini utilizes 4-channel NAND. According to this base M2 Mini tear down, there's only a pair of NAND pin-outs. The board doesn't seem to have space for four NAND chips unless the M2 Pro Mini has a different board/layout. Hope someone can post an M2 Pro tear down soon, I may need to modify my order.

View attachment 2147646
Here is an image of the M2 Pro Mac mini board, courtesy of Brian Stucki. shared by MacStadium's Brian Stucki
 

Attachments

  • M2 Pro Mac Mini.jpg
    M2 Pro Mac Mini.jpg
    602.3 KB · Views: 172
  • Like
Reactions: Mity and NeonNights
Thanks - so guess ordering the 1TB is the move to make then.
I have just cancelled my initial 512GB order and re-ordered the 1TB model with 32GB ram. 3k read/write vs 6k may not make much a difference now, but future proofing is necessary.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Mity
Really interesting if the M2 Pro Mac Mini utilizes 4-channel NAND. According to this base M2 Mini tear down, there's only a pair of NAND pin-outs. The board doesn't seem to have space for four NAND chips unless the M2 Pro Mini has a different board/layout. Perhaps faster NAND is spec'ed on the higher capacities (1TB and above). Hope someone can post an M2 Pro tear down soon, I may need to modify my order.

M2 Pro definitely has a different board layout. It's the reason why M2 Pro has an 8TB option while the M2 is limited to 2TB.
 
I have just cancelled my initial 512GB order and re-ordered the 1TB model with 32GB ram. 3k read/write vs 6k may not make much a difference now, but future proofing is necessary.
I also went to the store to config this to see the price. With a 10GbE option added it is so close to Mac Studio pricing… And the base Studio is frequently available with refurbs or 3rd party deals.
 
I also went to the store to config this to see the price. With a 10GbE option added it is so close to Mac Studio pricing… And the base Studio is frequently available with refurbs or 3rd party deals.
It is a hefty price. I will be using this Mac mini for audio production - the only reason I did not buy the Mac Studio last year was because of the fan noise/whining that comes with it. It is (albeit by only a small amount) louder than the Mac mini. I would rather reduced noise and slightly better single core performance with the M2 than an M1 refurbed Mac Studio.
 
It is a hefty price. I will be using this Mac mini for audio production - the only reason I did not buy the Mac Studio last year was because of the fan noise/whining that comes with it. It is (albeit by only a small amount) louder than the Mac mini. I would rather reduced noise and slightly better single core performance with the M2 than an M1 refurbed Mac Studio.
Well then at least you finally got a machine fitting your needs, despite this SSD drama. Should we thank Apple for having the M2 Pro available in the mini form? lol
 
I also went to the store to config this to see the price. With a 10GbE option added it is so close to Mac Studio pricing… And the base Studio is frequently available with refurbs or 3rd party deals.
I know. Even the Mac Mini M2Pro configured with 1TB SSD and 16GB Ram is only about $300 difference from base Studio. Tough decision, but I just like the size of the mini better. Do like the front ports of the Studio though.
 
Assume I am still better off to buy M2 or M2 Pro 16gb Ram and 1tb hard drive than buy a refurbished M1 Mac Mini with same configuration? This will replace a late 2012 27 iMac and plan on keeping a long time again.
 
So from what I'm gathering from all these posts,
M2 Mini with 256GB SSD (single NAND) – ~1500MB/s read/write
M2 & M2 Pro Mini with 512GB SSD (single NAND) - ~3000 MB/s read/write
M2 & M2 Pro Mini with 1TB SSD (double NAND) - ~6000 MB/s read/write

Kind of a bummer about the M2 Pro with 512GB SSD. I'm sitting here with it unopened on my desk. Debating whether to return it and wait 3 weeks for a BTO model with 1TB SSD. I'll probably end up keeping it since ~3000 MB/s isn't exactly slow.
 
Comparing my 2018 i5 Mini with 256GB SSD which supposedly uses the faster SSD. Here are my observations of the base M2 Mini.

Boot time for the 2018 Mini 18.41 secs.
Boot time for the M2 Mini 10.66 secs

2018 Mini Safari load time 1.35 secs
M2 Mini 0.95 secs

2018 Mini Microsoft Edge 3.68 secs
M2 Mini 0.72 secs.

That is just a quick summary. For a slow poke SSD in the M2 Mini, it looks to be on average 40-50% faster than my 2018 Mini. Memory with 8GB doesn't appear to be a big problem either. With multiple web browsers open and a couple of other apps, memory pressure never went above 60% as the OS began to compress memory.
 
  • Like
Reactions: GDF and adamcarvell
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.