Some SD Cards Not Working Properly With 2021 14 and 16-Inch MacBook Pros

[wilberforce]

So back on topic: What's the consensus here? Do people really believe Apple released these new machines with faulty hardware that will require a recall, or land in a class action lawsuit? Or, is this just another Monterey bug that an update will fix and growing pains? I am having a very hard time imagining that Apple does not thoroughly test these things.

Not sure if this is hardware or software.
This post indicates hardware:

Hey guys, if you have the ability to return I would. What I did: my original MacBook 16" did not recognize my cards as reported previously in this thread.

I ended up getting another one purchased and delivered from Best Buy and it works FLAWLESS with the exact same cards, same data, AND no format was applied to the cards too.

Simply, first one was a no go. 2nd machine works great.

Yikes this COULD be hardware!

This post indicates software:

Fingers crossed but after update to macOS 12.1 beta 4 I have no issues with a card I had problems with before. I keep testing. Anybody uses a beta channel, please do some tests.

Edit: Another SD card (JetDrive) no issues so far as well. Also Disk Utility is quick now. It was very slow before for me.

Edit2: Had 1 short pause during copying to JetDrive and write speed dropped from the usual 60 to 40MB/s for that drive. But it's old and almost full maybe that's the reason. Anyway, still no errors.

Edit3: Reading is stable on a full speed for that drive ~90MB/s. I do not have UHS-II cards to test maximum speeds.

Final edit: Yep, no issues for me. Tested two drives I had issues with before. Write/read speeds are according to specs for those drives. Looks like they did it. But let's wait on comments from other folks to celebrate it.

 

[dspdoc]

Not sure if this is hardware or software.
This post indicates hardware:


This post indicates software:

Wow! That is an interesting paradox. I don't even really use SD cards on my new M1 Max much. Suddenly I am feeling like I need to run out and buy a bunch to try just to make sure I don't have bunk hardware.

 

[wilberforce]

Wow! That is an interesting paradox. I don't even really use SD cards on my new M1 Max much. Suddenly I am feeling like I need to run out and buy a bunch to try just to make sure I don't have bunk hardware.

Yes, and the release notes for MacOS 12.1 RC don't say anything about bug fixes for the SD slot

 

[dspdoc]

Yes, and the release notes for MacOS 12.1 RC don't say anything about bug fixes for the SD slot

I wouldn't even know how to properly test the slot because I don't use it enough to know what the speeds and functionality should be like. :/

 

[paalb]

I wouldn't even know how to properly test the slot because I don't use it enough to know what the speeds and functionality should be like. :/

It is quite easy to know. With a card that is OK in the new macpro, you get an nearly even flow when you copy files with the same size over. So put in a file in the SD card and duplicate it 20 times and then make a copy to your mac. With a faulty card you get an uneven flow and a slow start and you might also get an Error code 100060 or Error code -36. The same card will be OK in an older mac, camera and external USB-C reader.

 

[wilberforce]

I wouldn't even know how to properly test the slot because I don't use it enough to know what the speeds and functionality should be like. :/

It's easy. Just run Black Magic Disk Speed Test, selecting the card as the "target drive," and see if you get speeds somewhere in the ballpark of the speeds they claim. (Like about 80% of what they claim).
Advantage of this test is you can compare directly with what other people get. It simply repetitively writes and reads a large file. (Which is actually a best case scenario, as writing/reading a bunch of small files is slower).

Part of the problem is that you can't conclude much from testing one card. It may work for that card, but not for another one. Testing one card (or only a few cards) can only prove the slot is faulty, it can't prove the slot is good. But you would know if it works for your card.

Cards are not cheap. If you don't use SD cards I wouldn't worry too much. Worst case, can always use a dongle

 

[Fomalhaut]

I can tell you that if you buy a HIGH-END SDXC card (I bought SanDisk 512GB Extreme PRO SDXC UHS-I
https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00NP699ZI )
(There appears to be a much newer version of this card now, twice as fast, half the price!)

it still delivers essentially the performance claimed. I just tried bulk moving some large files and got reads at 90MB/s, writes at 80MB/s. When I bought it, it did match the claimed specs (95 rd, 90 wr), and the file system has been reformatted once, maybe twice, (started life as JHFS+, now APFS) so there's an accumulation of both normal SSD HW wear and tear, and some file system data structure fragmentation.

This card is 4 years old now and while I don't know how to quantify how much I've used it (I don't think there's any sort of SMART equivalent for SD cards) it's what I would consider "normal" usage for a mac. No swapping to it, no running VM's on it, but frequent reading and writing of files, some large some small.

But as I keep saying it's all in how much you pay...
I see you can buy a card that claims to have better specs than mine, from EDCRFV (there's a well-known brand!) for $30. I fully expect that will *not* give you the same, perfectly acceptable, long-term experience as my SanDisk card (which at the time cost me 8x as much, and still costs about 3x as much).

That card is still pretty expensive, considering you can buy a 2TB Samsung T7 for about the same price, which will write/read up to 10x faster.

I bought a SanDisk UHS-II card similar to this one for use in a 4K mirrorless camera: https://www.amazon.com/SanDisk-Mirr...576&sprefix=SanDisk+UHS-II+300,aps,426&sr=8-3

It does indeed get close to the advertised 300MBbps read speed, but also does a lot better than the specified U3 write speeds (30MBps). I think it was actually over 100MBps write-speed most of the time.

I was somewhat duped into buying this card (at the time pretty expensive at about $130-140 IIRC) thinking that I would use it for 4K intra-frame video codecs (400Mbps - note: mega-bit) in a Pansonic GH5 camera. I couldn't see any quality difference between the 400Mbps codec and the 10-bit 4:2:2 AVC codec at 150Mbps, so just bought a load of much cheaper SanDisk V30 SDs that were a quarter of the price.

What is your reason for using SD cards as general storage given the poor price/speed/capacity and possible reduced reliability vs external SSDs? Is it just the size and convenience? Considering they don't fit flush with the computer, you have to remove them when putting the computer in a case, so if working at a desk, you might be better off with a small external disk. I can see that an SD would be good if you use a laptop in restricted spaces or on your lap. I used to velcro an SSD to the back of my laptop screen to make it easier to move around.

 

[hot-gril]

It's solid state! The dispositive variable should be reads vs writes, not so much random access!

I tried a quick test copying my Documents folder to the SDXC card. That's about 4.5GB with about 15,000 items -- the easiest " full of small files" folder I could find.
That copied over at essentially 80MB/s with a small glitch in the middle. Substantially better than I actually expected -- the combination of APFS and solid state storage is pretty damned impressive!
The drive of interest below is mjh (the one with the little SDXC icon next to it) and the two red areas show
(first one) a bulk write of some large files and
(second one) the write of the 4.5GB with 15,000 items.

Of course to get great performance you want to use at least JHFS+ and ideally APFS.
So many people seem to be using their external storage (whether SD card or SSD or hard drive) as whatever they bought it as, which is usually some version of DOS FAT, and is, of course, TERRIBLE in performance -- but that's all on the file system, not the actual hardware.

A folder full of small files might not be very random, depending on how closely the filesystem lays them out on disk. You're best off using a benchmarking tool like AmorphousDiskMark (since BlackMagic only does sequential) for this. Even though it's solid state, random is a lot slower. SSDs suffer a lot less than HDDs do with random writes, but they still suffer, and I think SD cards suffer even more, just from experience. Online results like this agree for SD cards. They're made for media, so it makes sense.

On my JHFS+ formatted SanDisk Ultra XC1 MicroSD card, albeit one filled with junk. Random write is ~1/20th the speed of sequential write:

 

[wilberforce]

That card is still pretty expensive, considering you can buy a 2TB Samsung T7 for about the same price, which will write/read up to 10x faster.

I bought a SanDisk UHS-II card similar to this one for use in a 4K mirrorless camera: https://www.amazon.com/SanDisk-Mirrorless-SDSDXPK-064G-ANCIN-Everything-Stromboli/dp/B07L6QP7PS/ref=sr_1_3?crid=2K3ODK5KALMNK&keywords=sandisk+extreme+pro+uhs-ii+300/260&qid=1639007576&sprefix=SanDisk+UHS-II+300,aps,426&sr=8-3

It does indeed get close to the advertised 300MBbps read speed, but also does a lot better than the specified U3 write speeds (30MBps). I think it was actually over 100MBps write-speed most of the time.

I was somewhat duped into buying this card (at the time pretty expensive at about $130-140 IIRC) thinking that I would use it for 4K intra-frame video codecs (400Mbps - note: mega-bit) in a Pansonic GH5 camera. I couldn't see any quality difference between the 400Mbps codec and the 10-bit 4:2:2 AVC codec at 150Mbps, so just bought a load of much cheaper SanDisk V30 SDs that were a quarter of the price.

What is your reason for using SD cards as general storage given the poor price/speed/capacity and possible reduced reliability vs external SSDs? Is it just the size and convenience? Considering they don't fit flush with the computer, you have to remove them when putting the computer in a case, so if working at a desk, you might be better off with a small external disk. I can see that an SD would be good if you use a laptop in restricted spaces or on your lap. I used to velcro an SSD to the back of my laptop screen to make it easier to move around.

Which reminds me of another small bone to pick with the new MBPs. My T7 read speed on my 2020 iMac is 910 MB/s, but only 670MB/s on the 2021 14" MBP. Others have found similar. Not a big deal, just did not expect it to be slower.

 

[Zorori]

Exactly, I almost want to quit Apple’s eco system with this release. This.. doesn’t feel right.

I quit the Pro range off the back of this release. Unfortunately, Apple listened to a vocal minority or "Pro" users, who define "Pro" as a single small field of work requiring ports most users have no use for. For example, MBPs have been a staple amongst developers (a "Pro" user that spends a lot on devices) and the only developers using the SD Reader are the weekend photographers.

SD Reader -- Never used one. Might as well have given me a DVD drive for all I care.
HDMI -- Used it about 3 years back, never again since. The places that don't have the USB-C dongle (or a cable) tend to be the same places that will have a projector that only takes VGA.
Mag Safe -- It's cool, but I'd probably just carry the USB-C cable instead.

I am so glad the Air isn't a crippled device like it was in the past.

 

[Fomalhaut]

Which reminds me of another small bone to pick with the new MBPs. My T7 read speed on my 2020 iMac is 910 MB/s, but only 670MB/s on the 2021 14" MBP. Others have found similar. Not a big deal, just did not expect it to be slower.

Welcome to the "M1 USB-speed discount".... I have 6 external SSDs and all are around 30% slower on my M1 Mac compared to an Intel Mac or Windows machine with USB 3.1gen2.

The "Constant Geekery" YT channel has some videos testing the M1 and the M1 Pro/Max with various SSDs, and they have the same results, although slightly reversed improvements on some disks on the M1 Max (IIRC) when going via a TB hub vs directly. (On my M1 Mini I get slightly better results through a CalDigit TB3 hub).

I'm just resigned to the fact that the USB implementation on Apple Silicon is not as fast as it was on their Intel machines. It's an unfortunate regression, but not a show-stopper.

I haven't run into any limits yet (other than increased time transferring tens of GB of video files). If it becomes an issue, I suppose I'll have to pony up for a Thunderbolt SSD drive/enclosure.

 

[wilberforce]

Even though it's solid state, random is a lot slower. SSDs suffer a lot less than HDDs do with random writes, but I think SD cards are worse. Online results like this show that with SD cards.

Wow, those random write speeds for SD cards look terrible!
SSD's like the T7 appear to have random write speeds much faster

 

[wilberforce]

Welcome to the "M1 USB-speed discount".... I have 6 external SSDs and all are around 30% slower on my M1 Mac compared to an Intel Mac or Windows machine with USB 3.1gen2.

The "Constant Geekery" YT channel has some videos testing the M1 and the M1 Pro/Max with various SSDs, and they have the same results, although slightly reversed improvements on some disks on the M1 Max (IIRC) when going via a TB hub vs directly. (On my M1 Mini I get slightly better results through a CalDigit TB3 hub).

I'm just resigned to the fact that the USB implementation on Apple Silicon is not as fast as it was on their Intel machines. It's an unfortunate regression, but not a show-stopper.

I haven't run into any limits yet (other than increased time transferring tens of GB of video files). If it becomes an issue, I suppose I'll have to pony up for a Thunderbolt SSD drive/enclosure.

How is it for the NVMe SSDs like the Samsung X5? If those are not getting near 2000 MB/s, it would push one towards getting a larger internal SSD

 

[CrysisDeu]

I quit the Pro range off the back of this release. Unfortunately, Apple listened to a vocal minority or "Pro" users, who define "Pro" as a single small field of work requiring ports most users have no use for. For example, MBPs have been a staple amongst developers (a "Pro" user that spends a lot on devices) and the only developers using the SD Reader are the weekend photographers.

SD Reader -- Never used one. Might as well have given me a DVD drive for all I care.
HDMI -- Used it about 3 years back, never again since. The places that don't have the USB-C dongle (or a cable) tend to be the same places that will have a projector that only takes VGA.
Mag Safe -- It's cool, but I'd probably just carry the USB-C cable instead.

I am so glad the Air isn't a crippled device like it was in the past.

Exactly 100%, I don’t know what drives Apple’s decision on this machine. The reason I initially made the argument of non-pro people should not speak for the pros is because… they are not pros, and they make false assumptions that many people believes. Anyways, Apple is so different from it used to be, that I happened to like a lot. Maybe now we need to be vocal and push for changes.

On the other side. I won’t consider mac as a good developer’s machine anymore.. so many compatibility issues and open source frameworks being deprecated. Now with windows linux subsystem available, maybe it’s time to swap.

Air.. I want that 120hz display and miniled, but I also need 64gb of memory and as much cpu cores as possible.
Pros are no longer a buying option for me.

 

[Fomalhaut]

How is it for the NVMe SSDs like the Samsung X5? If those are not getting near 2000 MB/s, it would push one towards getting a larger internal SSD

Not sure about the Samsung X5 specifically, but I understand people have been seeing around 2500MB/s (some higher) with the better TB3 drives combined with PCIe v3 or PCIe v4 NVMe SSDs. Maybe TB4 enclosures will give better results, but they must be pretty hard to find...

These won't touch the internal drive speeds of course, but are pretty decent for just about any kind of media.

 

[Fomalhaut]

Exactly 100%, I don’t know what drives Apple’s decision on this machine.

Apple needed to create a higher-tier Apple Silicon machine that would replace the differential between MacBook Air and entry-level MacBook Pros. The M1 Air & MBP were so close to the previous Intel MBP16 flagship model (with the exception of the GPU) that Apple needed to fill the gap with an Apple Silicon equivalent that recreated the status quo.

They have done exactly this with the M1 Pro / Max, in fact offering better options that we had before - you previously had to choose a 15/16" MacBook Pro to get the most CPU/GPU performance, and now you can get (almost) the same performance in a 14" body.

Regarding the ports? Presumably, Apple did some research and found that enough people wanted these to make it a selling point to add them again. HDMI is certainly useful to loads of people - anyone who has an external screen (except very high-end models) or needs to connect to a projector or TV. That is probably well over 50% of the target user-segment for these machines.

The reason I initially made the argument of non-pro people should not speak for the pros is because… they are not pros, and they make false assumptions that many people believes. Anyways, Apple is so different from it used to be, that I happened to like a lot. Maybe now we need to be vocal and push for changes.

How is Apple different now? They make very nice, albeit relatively expensive, computers that use a minority OS with a focus on consistent user experience. Quality has varied over the years - my 2007 MBP had a ton of issues (NVidia GPU, swollen battery, failed trackpad/keyboard) - but generally the experience has been the same.

I've had to be creative with finding solutions for software incompatibilities or finding alternatives (e.g. Omnigraffle vs Visio), but it's been a pretty good experience. I have an M1 Mini and have had no blockers with all the software I used on my Intel machines.

On the other side. I won’t consider mac as a good developer’s machine anymore.. so many compatibility issues and open source frameworks being deprecated. Now with windows linux subsystem available, maybe it’s time to swap.

Which frameworks? Not saying there aren't any, but your mileage may vary. It depends on what you do as a developer. Most common languages are supported, IDE support is good, if you can live with ARM builds, then Docker and VMs are available. You can access all Cloud platforms just as well from a Mac as anything else...I find it fine.

Air.. I want that 120hz display and miniled, but I also need 64gb of memory and as much cpu cores as possible.
Pros are no longer a buying option for me.

It's not clear what you want A MacBook Air with all the features of the M1 Pro/Max? Just get an M1 Pro/Max. Why aren't MBPs a "buying option" for you? price? size and weight? OS and tools support?

 

[appleph]

I'm planning to get one anytime, and I don't have any use case for an SD Card. Last time I used it to expand the internal storage, which turned out flaky (slow and intermittent detection). I feel that a card reader is such a specialized use case that merits the use of a dongle, but that's just my opinion.

 

[name99]

That card is still pretty expensive, considering you can buy a 2TB Samsung T7 for about the same price, which will write/read up to 10x faster.

I bought a SanDisk UHS-II card similar to this one for use in a 4K mirrorless camera: https://www.amazon.com/SanDisk-Mirrorless-SDSDXPK-064G-ANCIN-Everything-Stromboli/dp/B07L6QP7PS/ref=sr_1_3?crid=2K3ODK5KALMNK&keywords=sandisk+extreme+pro+uhs-ii+300/260&qid=1639007576&sprefix=SanDisk+UHS-II+300,aps,426&sr=8-3

It does indeed get close to the advertised 300MBbps read speed, but also does a lot better than the specified U3 write speeds (30MBps). I think it was actually over 100MBps write-speed most of the time.

I was somewhat duped into buying this card (at the time pretty expensive at about $130-140 IIRC) thinking that I would use it for 4K intra-frame video codecs (400Mbps - note: mega-bit) in a Pansonic GH5 camera. I couldn't see any quality difference between the 400Mbps codec and the 10-bit 4:2:2 AVC codec at 150Mbps, so just bought a load of much cheaper SanDisk V30 SDs that were a quarter of the price.

What is your reason for using SD cards as general storage given the poor price/speed/capacity and possible reduced reliability vs external SSDs? Is it just the size and convenience? Considering they don't fit flush with the computer, you have to remove them when putting the computer in a case, so if working at a desk, you might be better off with a small external disk. I can see that an SD would be good if you use a laptop in restricted spaces or on your lap. I used to velcro an SSD to the back of my laptop screen to make it easier to move around.

My goal in commenting on this thread was to correct various errors about SD card performance. Since we all now agree that the *right* cards perform as claimed, my commenting is over.

Complaints about the cost of hardware are endlessly boring. I use an SDXC card because I have one, and not using it would be stupid! If other people don't have one just sitting around, and have no compelling reason to buy one fine by me.

It is quite easy to know. With a card that is OK in the new macpro, you get an nearly even flow when you copy files with the same size over. So put in a file in the SD card and duplicate it 20 times and then make a copy to your mac. With a faulty card you get an uneven flow and a slow start and you might also get an Error code 100060 or Error code -36. The same card will be OK in an older mac, camera and external USB-C reader.

Obviously you're not using APFS. On APFS replicating a file multiple times will just generate a whole lot of clones (essentially multiple names in the directory that all point to the same storage). You might think that, even so, copying the set of clones to another driver would result in multiple copies on the target drive. Not so if the target drive is also APFS; all that will be copied is one version of the file, and the information that multiple clones should be created on the target drive.

If there is one thing I have tried to stress in this discussion, it is STOP USING YOUR SH##Y exFAT SD cards with ten years of accumulated fragmentation on them as exemplars of what SD cards can do! Zero the card (not just reformat, ZERO EVERY SECTOR) to force contiguity of flash pages, then reformat as APFS.

I don't work for the SD card association. You guys can do whatever you like with your cards. But honestly, I don't get why you're using your cards in such a way that they're guaranteed to perform badly, when you can have so much better an experience. If you use them with a camera that demands exFAT, well, that sucks, but at least zero and reformat them every so often to clean out the exFAT crud. But if you're using them PURELY as Mac auxiliary storage (the only use case I care about) then FFS, use APFS.

 

[paalb]

If you use them with a camera that demands exFAT, well, that sucks, but at least zero and reformat them every so often to clean out the exFAT crud.

Good advice which I practice.

Obviously you're not using APFS. On APFS replicating a file multiple times will just generate a whole lot of clones.

And yes if you want to do my test, do not use apfs, you can test with any other filesystem. Also test that they work OK in another older reader. Then you know it is not "exFat crud", but your new mac in combination with that card.

 

[Fomalhaut]

Complaints about the cost of hardware are endlessly boring. I use an SDXC card because I have one, and not using it would be stupid! If other people don't have one just sitting around, and have no compelling reason to buy one fine by me.

Fair enough; if you have a 512GB SD card knocking around and want to use it for files storage, that's fine. My point was that if you were looking for a new backup solution, an external SSD is generally going to be better and cheaper, unless you really need to have a minimal physical footprint and can't have connected devices with cables for some reason (e.g. working on a very small table or your lap).

Obviously you're not using APFS. On APFS replicating a file multiple times will just generate a whole lot of clones (essentially multiple names in the directory that all point to the same storage). You might think that, even so, copying the set of clones to another driver would result in multiple copies on the target drive. Not so if the target drive is also APFS; all that will be copied is one version of the file, and the information that multiple clones should be created on the target drive.

If there is one thing I have tried to stress in this discussion, it is STOP USING YOUR SH##Y exFAT SD cards with ten years of accumulated fragmentation on them as exemplars of what SD cards can do! Zero the card (not just reformat, ZERO EVERY SECTOR) to force contiguity of flash pages, then reformat as APFS.

I don't work for the SD card association. You guys can do whatever you like with your cards. But honestly, I don't get why you're using your cards in such a way that they're guaranteed to perform badly, when you can have so much better an experience. If you use them with a camera that demands exFAT, well, that sucks, but at least zero and reformat them every so often to clean out the exFAT crud. But if you're using them PURELY as Mac auxiliary storage (the only use case I care about) then FFS, use APFS.

I expect the majority of SD cards are used in cameras and most will format to exFAT. I reformat in-camera after every transfer. Maybe doing a low-level format every few months would be a good idea.

If used solely with a Mac for data storage, then yes, APFS sounds like a good idea.

 

[FrancescoDL]

Same problem here.
For 4 times they hang up the call on me. And they wouldn't call me back.
I wasted 8 hours on those calls.

I am a professional photographer, I am desperate, I don't know what to do.

 

[Manzanito]

Same problem here.
For 4 times they hang up the call on me. And they wouldn't call me back.
I wasted 8 hours on those calls.

I am a professional photographer, I am desperate, I don't know what to do.

Just use an external card reader until apple solves the issue. Not ideal, not cool, but other than returning the computer it’s your only option for the time being.

If you don’t have a reader available they are really cheap to buy, yet somehow manage to overcome the issues apple couldn’t ?.

 

[FrancescoDL]

Just use an external card reader until apple solves the issue. Not ideal, not cool, but other than returning the computer it’s your only option for the time being.

If you don’t have a reader available they are really cheap to buy, yet somehow manage to overcome the issues apple couldn’t ?.

Hey thank you.
Indeed I bought one, but with that it transfer about 30% slower than my old mid 2014 macbook pro.
I mean..
Are we really talking about Apple?

 

[dark_skies]

Same problem here.
For 4 times they hang up the call on me. And they wouldn't call me back.
I wasted 8 hours on those calls.

I am a professional photographer, I am desperate, I don't know what to do.

That's appalling. You have a right to expect better from the company.

 

[wilberforce]

Hey thank you.
Indeed I bought one, but with that it transfer about 30% slower than my old mid 2014 macbook pro.

I got this one, which is UHS-II. Fast transfers, slightly slower than my 2020 iMac. Don't use a multi-port hub that has a SD slot, as they are all slow for UHS-II cards.

Verbatim USB C Pocket Card Reader

Verbatim’s Pocket Card Reader features a modern compact design that makes transferring your digital photos fast and easy. This multi functional reader supports a wide variety of memory card formats including compatibility with SD Memory Stick and MMC interfaces. With it’s integrated USB cable the...

www.amazon.com

I feel your pain, especially when it starts to transfer then hangs and leaves some files corrupted or partially transferred, so I can't rely on the internal slot at all, as I can't be rolling the dice on these photos.