Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
New 15-inch Retina MacBook Pro Lives Up to Apple's Claims, Reaches SSD Throughput Speeds of 2GB/s
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
This is nowhere near Ramdisk speeds. A quad channel DDR4 x99 can easily reach like 80GB/s
The fastest 2.5" SATA SSDs are also by Samsung, and they reach Read/Write speeds of around 520/540 MBps. That's 1/4th what this drive can do.
Well what do you think drives the prices down? It's improvements like this that do. If manufacturers know that their fastest 1TB SATA drive is 1/4th the speed of a 1TB PCIe drive, and that limitation is on the SATA protocol itself, their only option is to lower the cost of the 1TB SATA drive so that it looks slightly more appealing.
The real question is, when is PCIe going to replace SATA in everything, and when can we start buying these chips off the shelf.
I would disagree. If a design is stable, I tend to choose it over the first generation of a new design. They did implement the updated trackpad. Historically Apple doesn't make hardware tweaks like that if they're about to redesign something. They just roll it into the redesign. I don't think you'll see anything of the sort in less than a year and quite possibly 2.
Anybody have a comparison between flash storage on exiting Macs? And why they are so many variations?
The best I can gather, Apple only publishes MacBook Air, MacBook Pro, and Mac Pro's.
Unofficially, it seems both retina MacBook and Mac mini are 775 MBps.
The best I can gather, Apple only publishes MacBook Air, MacBook Pro, and Mac Pro's.
- MacBook: ?
- MacBook Air: 1.5 GBps
- 13-inch MacBook Pro: 1.6 GBps
- 15-inch MacBook Pro: 2.0 GBps
- Mac mini: ?
- iMac: ?
- Mac Pro: 1.2GBps
Unofficially, it seems both retina MacBook and Mac mini are 775 MBps.
Still no 32GB Ram option.
Come on Apple, this is supposed to be a pro machine. 16 is not enough even for chrome these days.
My current Chrome session with 140 tabs eats 17gigs of ram.
What would someone be doing to need to have 140 tabs open?
EDIT: Plus Chrome is a resource hog on OS X, just saying.
I am sure we'll see a new redesign this year of the 15" MBP using same design concepts of the 12" MacBook. Hopefully they can slim down the overall size, if they do, I'll be the first one in line to buy.
Same here. I want a 15" because of the dedicated graphics card on the higher end model.
Very impressive. It's pretty sad though that Apple is getting this kind of performance out of their laptops while they still insist on using spinning hard drives as the default options for most of the standard Mac Mini and iMac configurations.
Interesting. Personally, I expect a new design with Skylake in 39 months. Time will tell.
Exactly! I made a sad mistake in buying a iMac Late 2012 with a Hard Drive. I think the fusion drive included as standard.
It's not apples fault. It's the limitation of DDR3.
----------
People buy macbook pros for it's performance. Hence the pro. People buy imacs/mac mini to browse the web and play facebook games. if you want a desktop performance get the mac pro.
Still no 32GB Ram option.
Come on Apple, this is supposed to be a pro machine. 16 is not enough even for chrome these days.
My current Chrome session with 140 tabs eats 17gigs of ram.
----------
People buy macbook pros for it's performance. Hence the pro. People buy imacs/mac mini to browse the web and play facebook games. if you want a desktop performance get the mac pro.
And people will still wonder how on par Win machines seem cheaper and faster... Yeah
There are tons of PC's vs Mac's and that's your answer not because of cheap. Also there are different price tiers . Also you can call it competition.
I'd be surprised if they were able to make it any thinner than currently.
The rMBP is already on the limit as far as cooling is concerned. If it was thinner they'd have to compromise on the performance, particularly with dGPU choices.
Also, Apple already make 2 lines of thin notebook now (Air and MB) so I think there is room to keep at least one notebook on the 'thicker' side and thus with better performance.
I was more implying the height and width of the laptop more so than depth. Those bezels on the screen can definitely be decreased based on the improvements to the backlit display
Imagine a 15" laptop the size of a 13" or little bigger
I disagree. They just updated the hardware. Also, the current Macbook Pro design is still very competitive. People who absolutely must have an über-thin super light laptop can buy the new Macbook. The MBP is the machine for everyone else.
I was more implying the height and width of the laptop more so than depth. Those bezels on the screen can definitely be decreased based on the improvements to the backlit display
Imagine a 15" laptop the size of a 13" or little bigger
Ah yes, I guess there is improvement possiblity there.
Also colour choices perhaps? Though might not fit in with 'Pro' ideals.
I sort of feel bad for Apple since Intel have been dragging their feet with Broadwell for so long, I guess they felt they couldn't wait any longer. I've seen a number of posters complaining about the slower RAM speeds etc, none of which is Apple's fault.
It IS Apple's fault. 4-slot laptops can take 32GiB of standard RAM. Intel provides guidance on supporting 32GiB RAM with 2 slots of Intelligent Memory on Broadwell. I guess this means I should actually be asking Apple for 64GiB.
Source please ?
I see absolutely no evidence for a major redesign or upgrade to the MBP coming soon.
I wouldn't be surprised if it doesn't get redesigned until 2017.
I understand why this would be very exciting for users like you, but for the large majority of users it is probably overkill.
Don't get me wrong, improvements in technology allowing for better performance are always a good thing, but I don't think that this gives most users a reason to replace their machines if they weren't already planning to.