Read/write speed of Feb 2013 rMBP 15"?

juantoothree4

macrumors member
Original poster
Mar 27, 2014
48
0
How much should I be getting?

I am only getting 400 plus-minus 15 on read/write compared to others' 600-700..

My rMBP:
2.4GHz Quad-core Intel i7
8GB of 1600MHz DDR3L SDRAM
256GB Flash Storage
NVIDIA GeForce GT 650M with 1GB of GDDR5 memory
 

827538

macrumors 65816
Jul 3, 2013
1,248
1,098
This is entirely normal. You have a SATA-3 based SSD. In pratice limited to around 540MB/s. But seeing as you use a 256GB drive the performance will be slightly less ~400MB/s. SSD's tend to get faster the more flash chips (more GB's) they have.

Only the later PCI-e SSD's are capable of 600-1000+MB/s (and way more but then we start talking about bus widths and it's 4am here). Still, ~400MB/s is still extremely quick.
 

yjchua95

macrumors 604
Apr 23, 2011
6,725
230
GVA, KUL, MEL (current), ZQN
How much should I be getting?

I am only getting 400 plus-minus 15 on read/write compared to others' 600-700..

My rMBP:
2.4GHz Quad-core Intel i7
8GB of 1600MHz DDR3L SDRAM
256GB Flash Storage
NVIDIA GeForce GT 650M with 1GB of GDDR5 memory
Your is the early-2013 ones, which still uses the older Ivy Bridge architecture and SATA3 SSD, just like the mid-2012 ones. So your speeds are normal.

Only the late-2013 ones can reach speeds in excess of 700MB/s because they use a PCIe SSD.
 

juantoothree4

macrumors member
Original poster
Mar 27, 2014
48
0
Ok thanks. I haven't really tested it out yet, but I will be soon. I know it is fast and I'm excited to see it, I've never owned an SSD before.

Although now I'm debating again if this model is good enough. When I see performance test results from the late-2013 MBP I get jealous and think twice about mine.

Also I have read some models like mine get the Samsung SSD which is way faster than the SanDisk? I think mine is the latter, if so, why didn't they give me the Samsung one? Is this true?
 

yjchua95

macrumors 604
Apr 23, 2011
6,725
230
GVA, KUL, MEL (current), ZQN
Ok thanks. I haven't really tested it out yet, but I will be soon. I know it is fast and I'm excited to see it, I've never owned an SSD before.

Although now I'm debating again if this model is good enough. When I see performance test results from the late-2013 MBP I get jealous and think twice about mine.

Also I have read some models like mine get the Samsung SSD which is way faster than the SanDisk? I think mine is the latter, if so, why didn't they give me the Samsung one? Is this true?
In PCIe drives, 256GB Samsung SSDs (SM0256F) is 150MB/s faster in writes than 256GB SanDisk SSDs (SD0256F). It's a lottery between SM and SD if you buy the 256GB variant.

That's why I went for 512GB in my 13" rMBP and 27" iMac. 512GB and 1TB are SM-only.

For my 21.5" iMac, I went for a 256GB and entered the lottery. And I got a SM :D
 

juantoothree4

macrumors member
Original poster
Mar 27, 2014
48
0
Oh wow. That kinda sucks, 150MB/s is a pretty big difference. What should I exchange mine? lol Return it and buy another one? Why won't they just give me Samsung? :(
 

dusk007

macrumors 68040
Dec 5, 2009
3,383
61
Oh wow. That kinda sucks, 150MB/s is a pretty big difference. What should I exchange mine? lol Return it and buy another one? Why won't they just give me Samsung? :(
It may sound like a lot to you but it really isn't. Past a certain point faster SSD do next to nothing for overall performance. It anything other than straight up copy of files the CPU will limit what gets done anyway.
HDD to any SSD is a huge improvement. SSD to even a twice as fast SSD is a small improvement and only noticeable in some situations. 150MB/s difference shouldn't even be noticable until you start up a benchmark.
 

juantoothree4

macrumors member
Original poster
Mar 27, 2014
48
0
It's still a little disappointing always knowing that I could have gotten a better device for the price I have paid for. I wish they wouldn't do this. It seems pretty unfair. We all pay the same and so should get the same, not better or worst. But thanks anyway.