New MacBook Owner - FileVault Yes/no?

[Queen6]

For any Mac with a drive(s) that is physically removable FV2 is a must; the only real exception being the 12" Retina as the SSD components are mounted directly onto the Logic Board, equally if the stored data is "sensitive" once again FV2 should be implemented, alongside Firmware password and user account password.

Any reduction in performance is highly unlikely to be perceptible on modern Mac`s with fast SSD`s, that said it will be heavily dependant on the systems age and performance. The only way to really see is to try it for yourself, nor would I rely on benchmarks too much, especially the 12" Retina due its new controllers implementation the results will likely be skewed.

On newer faster Mac`s FV2 is not an issue, on older systems with "spinners" a serious consideration, only really impacting startup & shutdown speed. The biggest consideration is what do you personally have to loose...

Q-6

 

[maflynn]

the only real exception being the 12" Retina as the SSD components are mounted directly onto the Logic Board, equally if the stored data is "sensitive" once again FV2 should be implemented, alongside Firmware password and user account password.

I think all data is sensitive at this point, and when talking about a portable machine, FV2 is definitely a must. Heck, I contemplate a desktop replacement for my current setup, I'm thinking of using FV2. I'm looking at the iMac and that drive is sealed in the computer and its not what you call a portable computer still to have my data encrypted provides peace of mind, if someone ever robbed my house.

 

[Max(IT)]

I actually got confused with drive speeds yesterday because I used FileVault on my new 13" Air and got speeds of 600 write/800 read which was much slower than I expected. Then I found out FileVault was the culprit, removed it and got 750/1300 MB/s. But do I actually FEEL a difference outside of Blackmagic? Hell no. So it's back on.

On my 13" MBP I'm getting 650 write/1300 read with FileVault enabled since the beginning ...

 

[Phil A.]

I use filevault on all my macs, including my rMB - I've not noticed any performance problems and I like the extra peace of mind.

Also, as I use my macs for my business, I have a duty of care to my customers to protect any of their data or personal information that might be on my machines

 

[ZebraDude]

One of my concerns is that I want to eek the most power out of my Macbook 1.1. I am working with XCode and that software can be taxing on a slower machine.

 

[Weaselboy]

One of my concerns is that I want to eek the most power out of my Macbook 1.1. I am working with XCode and that software can be taxing on a slower machine.

Just turn on FileVault and test it out. If it slows you down too much it takes one click to turn it back off. No harm in trying.

 

[Max(IT)]

One of my concerns is that I want to eek the most power out of my Macbook 1.1. I am working with XCode and that software can be taxing on a slower machine.

The MacBook is a slow machine except in one department: the SSD. I don't think FileVault will make any difference.

 

[maflynn]

Just turn on FileVault and test it out. If it slows you down too much it takes one click to turn it back off. No harm in trying.

Agreed, I found encrypting and decrypting to be fairly innocuous. That is you can enable or disabled fairly easily.

While its not a bad idea to ask for opinions, nothing beats first hand knowledge

 

[aloshka]

but for his specific mac, the hard drive cannot be pulled from logic board

I know this thread is old, but I noticed no one mentioned just put the Mac in target disk mode. And then with usb or thunderbolt you can just mount the drive. If FileVault is not enabled, you can just copy whatever you want.

 

[Mike Boreham]

Yes old thread but still relevant....

I use Filevault and don't notice a hit, but surprised by the data in this Arstechnica Review of the 2016 MacBook:

 

[Weaselboy]

Yes old thread but still relevant....

I wish they had done more than just that 8k random data test. I still don't think most people can tell the speed difference in day to day usage and it is well worth the small speed dip.

Here are some FV showing real world usage with not much difference.

 

[Mike Boreham]

I wish they had done more than just that 8k random data test. I still don't think most people can tell the speed difference in day to day usage and it is well worth the small speed dip.

Here are some FV showing real world usage with not much difference.

Thanks for that....I do agree that the hit is small and acceptable. It is logical that the boot time takes longer, but ironically I have just been temporarily working with my main volume unencrypted after a reinstall, and don't notice it rebooting twice as fast. I think that chart is a few years old so maybe something has changed since.

 

[Weaselboy]

Thanks for that....I do agree that the hit is small and acceptable. It is logical that the boot time takes longer, but ironically I have just been temporarily working with my main volume unencrypted after a reinstall, and don't notice it rebooting twice as fast. I think that chart is a few years old so maybe something has changed since.

I don't think FV has really changed, but the drive hardware is definitely much faster than it was I agree.