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

SSD... In real world performance...

Kal-037

Kal-037

macrumors 68020
Original poster
Apr 7, 2015
2,031
1,081
Depends on the day, but usually I live all over.
How much faster is the MBPr 13" SSD speed than last update? Is boot time or opening apps any faster or is it mostly transfering and copying files that are noticeable and if so by how much? Thanks to anyone for any help or info. I am just curious what "double the flash storage" means in terms of real use, not just "blackmagic speed test numbers" :)


Kal.
 
It's fast, but unless you were timing the two systems I doubt you'd notice a difference in day to day tasks.
 
You would ABSOLUTELY notice, on boot up and app opening. I remember i put a SSD 120GB in a older 2009 iMac with a core two duo, and it GREATLY helped. It would normally take like a minute and change to boot up. With the SSD it booted up in like 25 secs. Not to mention how much faster apps opened etc.
 
vanimal said:
You would ABSOLUTELY notice, on boot up and app opening. I remember i put a SSD 120GB in a older 2009 iMac with a core two duo, and it GREATLY helped. It would normally take like a minute and change to boot up. With the SSD it booted up in like 25 secs. Not to mention how much faster apps opened etc.
Click to expand...

OP is asking about the SSD in the current rMBP compared to the SSD in mid 2014 rMBP.

The SSD in the 2015 is faster for sure, but it isn't going to be very noticeable compared to the 2014 model.
 
As others have said, in the real world, it's negligible.

I've got a Late 2013 2.4/8/256 13" rMBP and a friend of mine recently got the newest 2015 model. It's nearly identical, but I'm still on Mavericks where he has Yosemite. Not that it has anything to do with the SSD speeds, but mine actually booted faster :rolleyes:

My 2013 gets around 750 MB/s tops (read and write) in BlackMagic for reference. 256GB Samsung SSD.
 
BrettApple said:
As others have said, in the real world, it's negligible.

I've got a Late 2013 2.4/8/256 13" rMBP and a friend of mine recently got the newest 2015 model. It's nearly identical, but I'm still on Mavericks where he has Yosemite. Not that it has anything to do with the SSD speeds, but mine actually booted faster :rolleyes:

My 2013 gets around 750 MB/s tops (read and write) in BlackMagic for reference. 256GB Samsung SSD.
Click to expand...

Yosemite is A LOT heavier feature wise compared to Mavericks. If you have to transfer larger files on the 2015 with SSD it will CRUSH the 2013. The read and write speed on the 2015 is A LOT higher. A SSD does more than just boot up and launch apps faster.
 
My apologies, i completely read his post wrong. I guess i was "skim" reading while watching TV. I thought he meant if he replaced a standard HDD with a SSD LMAO. :confused::mad:

Guess the title didn't explain it all for me.
 
In real world performance these SSDs are not even as fast as some that look much slower. The random performance isn't that impressive and has not gotten better. It is a lot of sequential speed that looks good on a spec sheet but that is it.
You may rarely find yourself in the situation to copy a file on the SSD because anytime you copy to any thing external that usb 3 or whatever will limit. But even in the rare case I doubt you would notice the difference if you didn't use a stop watch. Both will feel very fast.
Anything else it is either random read/write performance that is called for and/or the cpu will limit. If you unpack a rar or install a game or app the CPU will limit long before you even reach what the last generation SSDs could do.
The main problem is you need a much much faster CPU to get anything of a speed boost out of these SSDs. On a notebook like the 13" Macs it is purely for looking good on a spec sheet and nothing else.
 
Negligible on a day to day task basis.. Depends for what purpose you require double the speed...
 
Kal-037 said:
How much faster is the MBPr 13" SSD speed than last update? Is boot time or opening apps any faster or is it mostly transfering and copying files that are noticeable and if so by how much? Thanks to anyone for any help or info. I am just curious what "double the flash storage" means in terms of real use, not just "blackmagic speed test numbers" :)


Kal.
Click to expand...

We're at the point where one couldn't really distinguish between the two.
 
Here are real world benchmarks with various SSDs including the 2000MB/s SM951 Samsung PCIe SSD.
http://www.computerbase.de/2015-05/...fuer-den-m.2-slot/4/#diagramm-anwendungsstart
As you can see once you got any SSD which one doesn't really matter. They used to put HDDs in the graph and those are 4 times slower even the fastest hdds.
Even the ridiculously fast new SSD barely gets you 5% over on paper much slower SSDs.
unpacking uncompressed images is the only use case which can actually get real use out of the PCIe sequential speed. But add just a light compression in an archive and the cpu will limit there as well.
 
Kal-037 said:
How much faster is the MBPr 13" SSD speed than last update? Is boot time or opening apps any faster or is it mostly transfering and copying files that are noticeable and if so by how much? Thanks to anyone for any help or info. I am just curious what "double the flash storage" means in terms of real use, not just "blackmagic speed test numbers" :)


Kal.
Click to expand...

It's not a bottleneck anymore for most things, so you won't notice it much. First launch of programs before it is loaded into ram is probably the most noticeable. Not like it was slow on the 2013 model anyway.
 
The better/newer SSD in the new MBP uses PCIe-x4 and is therefore a faster interface than the SATA3 interface of the older MBP. As others have said, in the real world the difference is probably not noticeable. However if you stream to your SSD or load huge files, or in my case, save/open large Logic projects, then the faster SSD would be noticed. But even in my case, opening a 5GB project took 22 seconds on my 2012 MBA; the same project file opened on a new MBP at the local Apple Store took 15 seconds. Yes a noticeable difference, but I have no plans on selling my MBA and buying a new MBP for that reason alone. Speed of opening/saving files is not solely based on SSD speed.
 
dusk007 said:
Here are real world benchmarks with various SSDs including the 2000MB/s SM951 Samsung PCIe SSD.
http://www.computerbase.de/2015-05/...fuer-den-m.2-slot/4/#diagramm-anwendungsstart
As you can see once you got any SSD which one doesn't really matter. They used to put HDDs in the graph and those are 4 times slower even the fastest hdds.
Even the ridiculously fast new SSD barely gets you 5% over on paper much slower SSDs.
unpacking uncompressed images is the only use case which can actually get real use out of the PCIe sequential speed. But add just a light compression in an archive and the cpu will limit there as well.
Click to expand...

The question is, what SSD does the 2014 rMBP 15" use on that page you linked? :)


Kal.
 
Something similar but not quite as fast as the SM951 while the XP941 is about what the last gen 1000MB/s SSDs were equal to.
I don't know if they use the very same Samsung controllers with a slightly different firmware but anyway same difference.
The extra speed on paper amounts to next to nothing in actual performance benefits.
 
Kal-037 said:
The question is, what SSD does the 2014 rMBP 15" use on that page you linked? :)


Kal.
Click to expand...

The 15"s from late-2013 to mid-2014 use the XP941-based SSDs, but they perform much faster than the 128GB XP941 shown in that German site.

The 128GB is much slower compared to the 256GB and 512GB XP941s (these two perform at around 650-750MB/s), while the 1TB XP941 performs around 950MB/s-1000MB/s.
 
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