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 256GB Mac Mini and 512GB MacBook Pro Have Slower SSD Speeds Than Previous Models
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Can anyone post anything else that isn't only sequential?
Can anyone confirm that the Mac Mini M2 - 512GB (second of the four confirmations above) comes with 2 256GB NAND Chios and not one 512GB with any documentation or tear down Article or video?
So many comments about 'nothing burger' or it won't be noticeable, even the Ferrari only doing 200 instead of 220mph, but they all miss the point in my opinion.
Apple was built on its progressive ideology, indeed Steve Jobs leaving Apple was because he wanted to build something better, more usable and although his NeXT computer wasn't the business success it was certainly progressive along with NeXTOS, which forced Apple to buy HIM back with NeXTOS then being the mainstay operating system for every device that came after, PROGRESSIVE.
Apple's actions over the SSD are REGRESSIVE.
Customers expect products to evolve and to be better in every way, perhaps not incrementally on occasions, but still better, never worse.
The situation with the SSD's hits Apple's reputation badly, and if it is just about an extra bit of profit, then its a bad mistake.
Some suggest that only tekkies go into the minutiae of SSD capability, and that in the main customers don't, they just look at a machine, go into the shop or online and buy it, which judging from some posts about the colour, may be true, but it still eventually filters through that Apple products no longer progress.
It is the progression and the legitimate expectation that each new device betters the previous in every way, and damaging that themselves is a gift to competitors.
For many the SSD speeds may not be noticeable, but that does not alter the fact that the expected progression has halted, even in just the relative speeds of the SSD's.
Apple command a premium, and I hate the term 'fanboys or fangirls', but inevitably and I include myself I changed over from the Wintel platform decades ago, and yes there have been some 'howlers' along the way as far as products go, but always with the intention of progression.
With Moore's law the number of transistors is progressing, but in Apple's M2 relative to how the SSD's are set up, it has broken the protocol that 'we can expect the SPEED and CAPABILITY of our computers to INCREASE....'
Apple need to ensure their products PROGRESS in every way and sadly on some of the M2 configurations they have failed.
Whether its noticeable, whether that Ferrari can only do 200 instead of 220 is not the point.
Apple was built on its progressive ideology, indeed Steve Jobs leaving Apple was because he wanted to build something better, more usable and although his NeXT computer wasn't the business success it was certainly progressive along with NeXTOS, which forced Apple to buy HIM back with NeXTOS then being the mainstay operating system for every device that came after, PROGRESSIVE.
Apple's actions over the SSD are REGRESSIVE.
Customers expect products to evolve and to be better in every way, perhaps not incrementally on occasions, but still better, never worse.
The situation with the SSD's hits Apple's reputation badly, and if it is just about an extra bit of profit, then its a bad mistake.
Some suggest that only tekkies go into the minutiae of SSD capability, and that in the main customers don't, they just look at a machine, go into the shop or online and buy it, which judging from some posts about the colour, may be true, but it still eventually filters through that Apple products no longer progress.
It is the progression and the legitimate expectation that each new device betters the previous in every way, and damaging that themselves is a gift to competitors.
For many the SSD speeds may not be noticeable, but that does not alter the fact that the expected progression has halted, even in just the relative speeds of the SSD's.
Apple command a premium, and I hate the term 'fanboys or fangirls', but inevitably and I include myself I changed over from the Wintel platform decades ago, and yes there have been some 'howlers' along the way as far as products go, but always with the intention of progression.
With Moore's law the number of transistors is progressing, but in Apple's M2 relative to how the SSD's are set up, it has broken the protocol that 'we can expect the SPEED and CAPABILITY of our computers to INCREASE....'
Apple need to ensure their products PROGRESS in every way and sadly on some of the M2 configurations they have failed.
Whether its noticeable, whether that Ferrari can only do 200 instead of 220 is not the point.
Thanks, that’s a start. I was looking for external validation and I can’t seem to find it anywhere online. If confirmed, it would justify the upgrade IMO.
The BTO just started arriving so it may be a few days. The person who posted was in Norway...
That makes sense. This guy has it but only posted the video on the 256GB base model so far:
Not Norway, but close = Denmark
, I didn't open the standard Mac Mini 512GB, but just measured the SSD speed.It's really an impressive Mac, IMO great performance and good value for the money.
So what's the random reads and writes in comparison?
I would take it/send it back and get a refund from Apple (your have 14 days) and get a Mac Mini M2 Pro model with 1TB instead if you can afford it. It should serve your longer, and have the full 6,000 MB/s SSD read and write speed. It appears the regular Mac Mini M2 (Non Pro) models are limiting to 3,000 MB/s on the 512GB, 1TB, and 2TB models due to a PCI channel limitation, which the M2 Pro chip is not limited by, hence the 1TB or larger Mac Mini M2 Pro models can reach 6,000 MB/S, while the 512GB M2 Pro model can only do 3,000 MB/s due to the number of 256GB SSD nand chips (2) Apple chose to use in the 512GB Mac Mini M2 Pro model. This 3,000 MB/s limitation also applies to both the 14" and 16" MacBook Pro M2 Pro 512GB and MacBook Pro M2 Max 512GB models, but is the full 6,000 MB/s on the 1TB MacBook Pro M2 Pro or M2 Max models. Note the 256GB Mac Mini M2 (non Pro) model is limited to 1,500 MB/s.
Here are the updated SSD speeds for Mac Mini M2, Mac Mini M2 Pro, and 14" MacBook Pro M2 Pro and M2 Max:
Mac Mini M2 (non Pro) at 256GB SSD is about 1,500 MB/s. (1 x 256GB SSD nand chip)
Mac Mini M2 (non Pro) at 512GB SSD is about 3,000 MB/s. (2 x 256GB SSD nand chip)
Mac Mini M2 (non Pro) at 1TB is about 3,000 MB/s. (Not sure about nand chips/sizes)
Mac Mini M2 Pro at 512GB SSD is about 3,000 MB/s. (2 x 256GB SSD nand chip)
Mac Mini M2 Pro at 1TB SSD is about 6,000 MB/s. (4 x 256GB SSD nand chip)
Mac Mini M2 Pro at 2TB, 4TB, or 8TB SSD is about 6,000 MB/s. (This needs to be confirmed.)
14" MacBook M2 Pro with 512GB SSD is about 3,000 MB/s. (1 X 512GB SSD nand chip)
14" MacBook M2 Pro with 1TB SSD is about 6,000 MB/s. (2 X 512GB SSD nand chip)
14" MacBook M2 Max with 512GB SSD is about 3,000 MB/s. (1 X 512GB SSD nand chip)
14" MacBook M2 Max with 1TB SSD is about 6,000 MB/s. (2 X 512GB SSD nand chip)
Note: The 16" MacBook Pro models with 512GB should also be limited to 3,000 MB/s. The Mac Mini M2 (Non Pro) model appears to have a PCI controller limitation that limits the 512GB, 1TB, and 2TB SSD models to 3,000 MB/s.
Mac Mini M2 (non Pro) at 256GB SSD is about 1,500 MB/s. (1 x 256GB SSD nand chip)
Mac Mini M2 (non Pro) at 512GB SSD is about 3,000 MB/s. (2 x 256GB SSD nand chip)
Mac Mini M2 (non Pro) at 1TB is about 3,000 MB/s. (Not sure about nand chips/sizes)
Mac Mini M2 Pro at 512GB SSD is about 3,000 MB/s. (2 x 256GB SSD nand chip)
Mac Mini M2 Pro at 1TB SSD is about 6,000 MB/s. (4 x 256GB SSD nand chip)
Mac Mini M2 Pro at 2TB, 4TB, or 8TB SSD is about 6,000 MB/s. (This needs to be confirmed.)
14" MacBook M2 Pro with 512GB SSD is about 3,000 MB/s. (1 X 512GB SSD nand chip)
14" MacBook M2 Pro with 1TB SSD is about 6,000 MB/s. (2 X 512GB SSD nand chip)
14" MacBook M2 Max with 512GB SSD is about 3,000 MB/s. (1 X 512GB SSD nand chip)
14" MacBook M2 Max with 1TB SSD is about 6,000 MB/s. (2 X 512GB SSD nand chip)
Note: The 16" MacBook Pro models with 512GB should also be limited to 3,000 MB/s. The Mac Mini M2 (Non Pro) model appears to have a PCI controller limitation that limits the 512GB, 1TB, and 2TB SSD models to 3,000 MB/s.
Last edited:
Unfortunately even the 512GB on the 16" MBP looks like binned to 3GB/s.
I should receive it tomorrow (or in few days); I'm already planning to return it and get a smaller 14" MBP with 1TB of storage (which has the same price)
What uses cases do you have, where you will benefit more from the extra SSD speed of the 14", than from the extra screen size and battery life that the 16" has?
All SDD are faster than any HDD before though. I can buy an 8TB SSD for under $700 on Amazon that I’m sure would work just fine. I’m currently running my iMac with a 4TB one I bought a couple years ago for under under $500 . I care about the storage more than the speed. Ya can barely have the oS and your apps on a 256. I have a 512 at work that barely has any local files stored on it and photoshop still eats the drive as a scratch disc
edit: made a mistake in RAM of base model of M1 Mac mini.
I could hardly disagree with you more. Your whole argument assumes that bigger numbers and better specs makes a product "better." Although the innovation and disruptive aspect of Apple have clearly slowed down over the last few years (and I'd like to think it's because the overall marketplace is more innovative and creative then ever before), better specs does not make innovation and does not equal progress. I'd argue that it would be way more market disruptive if they could, through innovative coding methods and efficient system architecture, provide the same experience with a 1,500 MB/s SSD and 8 GB ram setup than their competitors can with a 6,000 MB/s SSD and 32 GB RAM (not claiming they're currently doing that).
There are many ways to evaluate progress and although counting performance metrics of individual components is one of them, to me, it's most likely one of the worst approaches to do so. Even Steve Jobs once quoted Henry Ford "If I'd asked customers what they wanted, they would have told me, 'A faster horse!'" as an exemple to avoid... Increasing spec does not necessarily improve a product.
I do feel that Apple may have just made an immense step forward, in this most recent product launch, by bringing a very affordable (for them) product to the market. Not having affordable product has always been a sticky point when it came to workplace integration and more budget-conscious environment. Maybe that's a great place to position the Mac mini from now on. I remember, when they introduced the Mac Studio, there were concerns as to the future of the Mac mini, after all, their desktop options are a bit crowded:
- iMac
- Mac Pro
- Mac Studio
- Mac Mini
Now, I've read things around 8 GB system being nearly a "crime" and things of the sort... But, true story, 4 years ago, my employer got hundreds of "new laptops" with 4 GB ram configuration... We actively had to demonstrate, through extensive documentation of real life situations, that it was, in no way, enough to efficiently run Windows 10 and do the work that was demanded from us. And through our efforts, some of the teams were upgraded to 8 GB system. I've changed workplace since then, but I do believe the current laptop I'm provided is also configured with an 8 GB setup and although I wouldn't go below 16 GB for my personal needs, I haven't had any reason to complain about the performance of that machine.
Thing is, that new Mac mini may be a great step forward to provide something Apple has been lacking for 20+ years, a more affordable product and I can't help but wonder... If everyone is upset... How should they have done it? Lots of people seem upset about what they did and, in a way, I kind of get it... There's a new system that's introduced, you expect it to be "better" and, in some regard, it seems a step backward. Even worst, they made it so that if you take an "upgrade path" that seems to be cheaper, you seem to be moving backwards. But they really just introduced a "new product" to their line-up... If we look at their 2020 Mac mini lineup and compare them...
Mac mini M1 (2020)
Launch price: $6998-Core CPU, 8-Core GPU
8GB RAM
256GB SSD Storage (3,000 MB/s)
Mac mini M2 (2023)
Launch price: $5998-Core CPU, 10-Core GPU
8GB Unified Memory
256GB SSD Storage (1,500 MB/s)
Launch price: $799
8-Core CPU, 10-Core GPU
8GB Unified Memory
512GB SSD Storage (3,000 MB/s)
I'd argue that with inflation and the global economic situation, the "natural evolution path" of the product would be to go from the 2020 $699 system to the 2023 $799 system. And if you do so, you'd go from 256 SSD to 512 SDD, plus you get the benefit of going from M1 to M2... (not mentioning all the other upgrades like bluetooth 5.3, HDMI 2.0 or 2.1, thunderbolt 4, etc... for the sake of being brief)
Now... Let's say they wanted to introduce a new product with a price point below $600 and found out that to fit into their margins and all the financial stuff that's way beyond my comfort zone to discuss, they had to go for an 8 GB architecture and 1,500 MB/s setup... How should they have done it? Should they have made a new product called the "Mac mini mini"? Should they have created a new branding altogether? How should they have acted so we would've been happy about their decision to introduce a system with 8 GB ram configuration and a lower spec SSD, at a lower price point then all their curent offerings?
Last edited:
So basically he loves it, says it’s a little slower than his M1 Max Studio ($6000, 10x the price, he says), when doing 4x 4K simultaneous playback/edit in workstream editing, but otherwise is a very capable performer for $600.
And at $500, an even better deal. Cool.
And at $500, an even better deal. Cool.
Im predicting that Apple will have at least a 50% ssd performance improvement in the up and coming M3 Macs, its gonna be epic!
While the new Mac mini with the M2 chip has a lower $599 starting price, the base model with 256GB of storage has slower SSD read and write speeds compared to the previous-generation model with the M1 chip and 256GB of storage.
A teardown of the new Mac mini shared by YouTube channel Brandon Geekabit reveals that the 256GB model is equipped with only a single 256GB storage chip, while the same configuration with the M1 chip has two 128GB chips. This difference explains why the new model has a slower SSD, as multiple NAND chips allow for faster speeds.
We have confirmed with the Blackmagic Disk Speed Test benchmarking app that SSD read and write speeds for the new 256GB Mac mini are each around 1,500 MB/s, which is anywhere from 30% to 50% slower than read and write speeds for the equivalent previous-generation model, although benchmark results and real-world performance can vary.
Customers who are looking for the fastest SSD speeds should ensure they configure their M2 Mac mini with at least 512GB of storage to avoid this issue. A slower SSD can impact file transfer speeds, and overall performance can also take a slight hit since Macs temporarily use SSD space as virtual memory when physical RAM is fully used.
As for the higher-end Mac mini with the M2 Pro chip, the base model with 512GB of storage appears to have two fewer NAND chips than the Intel-based model it replaced, according to a teardown shared by MacStadium's Brian Stucki.
13-inch MacBook Pro and MacBook Air models with the M2 chip and 256GB of storage also have slower SSD speeds due to a single NAND chip, and evidently Apple has not decided to change course with the new Mac mini.
In a statement shared with The Verge last year, Apple claimed that M2-based Macs have "even faster" performance for real-world activities, but it's unclear if the statement was referring to SSD performance or overall system performance:We have reached out to an Apple spokesperson for additional comment on the matter and will update this story if we hear back.
Update: As noted by 9to5Mac, the new MacBook Pro also has slower SSD speeds when configured with 512GB of storage due to a reduction in NAND chips.
Article Link: New 256GB Mac Mini and 512GB MacBook Pro Have Slower SSD Speeds Than Previous Models
No, that wrong. Stop spreading misinformation there.
14" MacBook M2 Pro with 512GB SSD is about 3,000 MB/s. (2 X 256GB SSD nand chip)
14" MacBook M2 Pro with 1TB SSD is about 6,000 MB/s. (4 X 256GB SSD nand chip)
14" MacBook M2 Max with 512GB SSD is about 3,000 MB/s. (2 X 256GB SSD nand chip)
14" MacBook M2 Max with 1TB SSD is about 6,000 MB/s. (4 X 256GB SSD nand chip)
But they way macOS uses swap it will happen a long time before you hit a low memory state. And the swap happens in much smaller bits which makes these tests useless for testing swap speeds.
And yet, the machine is still using almost 1Gb of memory for disk caching and not applications.