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

New MBP 16" M1 Max- Not impressed.

Jdhommert said:
Please give as much details as you can. I basically Only use my MBP for Safari, but I’m a tab WHORE. Trying to decide on 32 or 64. How many tabs,when do you notice a slow down etc
Click to expand...


First of all, there is an OS bug that is affecting Intel and M1 systems. It has nothing to do with these new models. To answer your question, the 13" M1 MBA with 16GB of RAM handles a lot of tabs very well, so if you get the M1 Pro, you'll probably not run into any issues. If you want to be extra sure and you have cash to burn, 32GB of RAM will be more than enough for your purposes. You have absolutely no need for 64GB of RAM unless you load hundreds of tabs and need to be put in jail. I do far more demanding and memory intensive tasks during my workday than loading tabs and I am constantly pleased how fast and instant things are.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • Like
Reactions: Romain_H and 3Rock
chabig said:
Lightroom is the problem, not the Mac. There is another thread about extraordinary Lightroom RAM use.
Click to expand...
No. Lightroom for AS runs like butter. This is an OS bug, nothing else. Don't understand the fuss about the hardware. Needs to be fixed by Apple quickly, though.
 
Silvestru Hosszu said:
I have to confess that I tried it last time 3 or 4 years ago when a library of 50-60.000 of pics was finicky at best (worse lags than LR). Many on photo oriented forums advised to use sessions instead of catalogue, but that came with it own drawbacks. Furthermore, the printing module in LR was really convenient.
Do you think that now COP is appropriate for such needs as described above?
Click to expand...

If you tried COP in 2017 or 2018 you saw some of the worst years of Capture One Pro. The only thing that kept me from jumping ship was that those were famously bad years for LightRoom too. Performance in Capture One Pro got much better around 2019 and it also got features that made me no longer need an external photo editor for all but the trickiest edits.

I might wait a while before trying it again though. The last time Apple went through a major architecture change, Capture One Pro seemed to be totally lost (that would be 2017 and 2018). Perhaps they were just having problems getting their program to the next level and the hardware change was just a coincidence.

I use Capture One in catalog mode and it works fine for me. I tend to keep my catalogs to about 10,000 images each. I've had as many as 20,000 in a single catalog. I don't recall catalog size having a noticeable effect on performance for me.

The only performance stutter I currently have is when I'm reviewing and culling images on my 27" 5K monitor. It seems to be entirely ignoring cached preview files and re-rendering from RAW every time you flip through images when you go big on an external display.

For this reason alone, I sunk extra money on an M1 Max. I really like using COP to catalog my images and that slight hiccup I keep getting is impeding my ability to manage my image library.

If you do decide to try COP again, notice that they have specialized editions for different camera lines. If you only use one camera brand, just buy the version branded for your camera. It's the same thing, but cheaper and it only supports cameras from one maker.
 
I`ll have to refresh these days my system anyway. You convinced me to give another shot to COP. Will have to buy the unlocked edition cause using multiple camera systems. But if it works, it is money well spent. I`m totally fed up with LR.

PS
For strictly culling images I use FastRawViewer, it is excellent and at a certain moment it was the only program which offered real RAW preview and not the embeded JPG.
 
@Jdhommert

20+ tabs it's slowing down.

@syncopy

Nope, im only used to faster systems and not trapped into the Apple ecosystem. If i buy a laptop for around 3000 Euros and it's slowing down even when using a few browser tabs, there is a huge gap between price and performance.

And it has 12-13 gb of 16 gb allocated ram, when slowing down. I really believed this strict Apple users who are saying mac os has such a good ram handling. Lol. It's the same ..... i see on windows. You need much more than 16 gb ram.

But on windows you can upgrade the ram by yourself pretty cheap. For mac you have to pay 400 US Dollar extra for only 16 gb in addition :D.

And people are saying you can use the 16 gb version and if it's swapping it's fast enough. Yeah. 200/400 gb/s vs. max. 7 gbyte/s (reallity with smaller files below 1 gb/s) bandwith. And the ssd wear out increased massively because of this.

We know apple, they used the cheapest flash chips. How much is their tbw? 200 - 400 gbyte/s? Yeah, we want throw this macbook after a short usage away.
 
Last edited:
  • Haha
Reactions: njn007
You know, there are others who are multiplatform users here (I have 2 powerful windows desktops + win laptop + mac) and what you are saying just isn't our experience.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Romain_H
They used last time for M1 Western Digital labled flash chips. This time it won't be chips from another brand.

They have only 600 tbw for 1 tb version and the half (300 tbw) for 500 gb version :D. If the memory is exhausted you can throw this mac book away.
 
Last edited:
Somehow I don't recall many individuals posting here about how they had to throw away their laptops. And mind you, some here are using intensively their devices for almost a year!
 
  • Like
Reactions: Romain_H
ASX said:
@Jdhommert

20+ tabs it's slowing down.

@syncopy

Nope, im only used to faster systems and not trapped into the Apple ecosystem. If i buy a laptop for around 3000 Euros and it's slowing down even when using a few browser tabs, there is a huge gap between price and performance.

And it has 12-13 gb of 16 gb allocated ram, when slowing down. I really believed this strict Apple users who are saying mac os has such a good ram handling. Lol. It's the same ..... i see on windows. You need much more than 16 gb ram.

But on windows you can upgrade the ram by yourself pretty cheap. For mac you have to pay 400 US Dollar extra for only 16 gb in addition :D.

And people are saying you can use the 16 gb version and if it's swapping it's fast enough. Yeah. 200/400 gb/s vs. max. 7 gbyte/s (reallity with smaller files below 1 gb/s) bandwith. And the ssd wear out increased massively because of this.

We know apple, they used the cheapest flash chips. How much is their tbw? 200 - 400 gbyte/s? Yeah, we want throw this macbook after a short usage away.
Click to expand...
BTW just thought I'd add many windows laptops you are now unable to change memory once ordered as it's soldered onto the motherboard! I have access to both Windows systems and Macbooks and use both, there are advantages and disadvantages to both platforms.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • Like
  • Haha
Reactions: dead flag blues, Romain_H, 3Rock and 1 other person
SDRGJHI4 – 128GB Flash storage (x2) for M1

de.ifixit.com

M1 MacBook Pro and Air Teardowns

Past, meet future—it’s a mix of old and new in our dual teardown of the newest M1-powered MacBooks.
de.ifixit.com de.ifixit.com

Maybe the chips are from Samsung. But the tbw is the same. 980 Pro 1 tb has 600 tbw.
 
The M1 Pro 2021 is using:

KICM225VF9081

de.ifixit.com

2021 MacBook Pro Teardown: A Glimpse at a Better Timeline

We’re done with the new-but-also-classic 2021 MacBook Pro teardown, both 14 and 16-inch versions, and they’re full of happy surprises. Dig in with us.
de.ifixit.com de.ifixit.com

It's very likely it has only 400 tbw like the other consumer kioxia 1 tb ssds. the 500 gb model has only 200 tbw. Then it's 1/3 less durable than the samsung nand flash chips. Pretty weak for such a high priced notebook.

The M1 Pro 2020 was also using nand flash from Kioxia.
 
Last edited:
It states the manufacturer. And this tbw are very common and likely for their 500 and 1000 gb ssd's.

Why did Apple choose this manufacturer? Obviously because it's cheaper than Samsung. The new macbooks have eyewatering prices for ssd upgrades and then they use this cheap nand flash.
 
Oh sure, it states the manufacturer. Says nothing. You keep making outrageous claims, but cannot provide anything that corroborates your claims. Thank you for discussing
 
Do you really think they will not use their common tlc nand flash for this apples :D. Do you think apple really cares about tbw of 200 to 400 gb? They will take the additional money if it's cheaper.
 
ASX said:
Do you really think they will not use their common tlc nand flash for this apples :D. Do you think apple really cares about tbw of 200 to 400 gb? They will take the additional money if it's cheaper.
Click to expand...
"Do you think" is not enough. Do think any manufacturer cares?

You may think what you want, but if you make claims and cannot provide anything as evidence you cannot be taken seriously.
 
MOD NOTE

Lets keep things friendly in this thread. And a reminder of some simple ground rules that are clearly outlined in Forum Rules that everyone agrees to when posting and using this site.

1. All opinions / viewpoints are welcome on here.
2. If you are asked to provide a source to validate your claim, it is your responsibility to do that, or, retract your claim.
- Rules regarding appropriate debate outlines this
  1. Sources. If you claim that something's a fact, back it up with a source. When evidence of your claim is requested, you can either provide evidence or retract your claim. If you can't produce evidence when someone asks you to cite your sources, we may remove your posts. If you started the thread, then we may remove or close the thread.
Click to expand...
3. Avoid personal insults / name calling. If you are in an impass with another user and can't agree, please move on.

This thread is requiring a fair amount of Moderator time to police. If it continues the thread will simply be closed.
 
@Romain_H

Ok, if it's not enough "proof" for you. Based on my research about ssds from this manufacturer i noticed the amount (200 tbw for 500 gb and 400 tbw for 1000 gb) of tbw is likely.

But the time will bring up user reviews which are showing the wear out of this flash. I'm aware of having only 400 tbw. It's better to know this. A soldered ssd isn't swappable.

The risk for me of having a weared out ssd is not so high, because i wouldn't use the 16 gb ram version anymore and i'm not using this mbp 24/7 h per day as a work station. For professionals it could be a major concern.

@Mod

Then look for the ssd's of this manufacturer Kioxia, max for 1 TB is 400 tbw. You said opinions are ok.

​

 
Last edited:
ASX said:
@Romain_H

Ok, if it's not enough "proof" for you. Based on my research about ssds from this manufacturer i noticed the amount (200 tbw for 500 gb and 400 tbw for 1000 gb) of tbw is likely.
Click to expand...
So then please provide the sources you used for your research
 
Kioxia (former Toshiba) which is supplier for nand flash of macbook pro 2021 has only this 96-Layer-Bics-4-TLC-NAND and 112-Layer-Bics-5-TLC-NAND. There is not much room for speculations about tbw.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back