SSD SD0256F (SanDisk) vs SM0256F (Samsung)

nhhc

macrumors newbie
Original poster
Jan 21, 2014
23
0
There are two sources for 256GB SSD on our Retina 13".

I, unfortunately, got the SanDisk one and my Write speed 550MB/s is 150MBs slower than what the Samsung one gets according to BlackMagic Design Disk Test.

I would like to know what other SanDisk SSD MacBook Retina 13" owners are getting for their Write Speed. Is SanDisk SD0256F consistently 150MB/s slower than Samsung SM0256F counterpart?

Here is a great benchmark that includes both drives and also other MacBook Pro SSD options (512, 1024, etc).

http://www.harddrivebenchmark.net/ssd.html


Appreciate any inputs, thank you!
 

TheEnthusiast

macrumors regular
Aug 22, 2013
146
3
The drive is still pretty fast :D. I'm willing to bet that other Sandisk SSDs share similar speeds. The difference between brands is probably down to the use of different controllers. Even then, the difference won't be noticeable during real world usage, which is probably why Apple uses SSDs with variable speeds; The difference won't matter for most consumers. If anything, the difference would probably be noticeable if all a user does is transfer large files all day. The random read/write speeds (not the sustained ones you are focusing on) are important too, though I don't know the figures off the top of my head. Ultimately, it's up to you to do something if you feel hard done by it, or if you know that you're going to lose sleep over it.

My advice: considering this is the second thread you've made in relation in to this topic today, you'd be best served doing an exchange or return. You should also check for those display issues people here complain about.
 

nhhc

macrumors newbie
Original poster
Jan 21, 2014
23
0
The drive is still pretty fast :D. I'm willing to bet that other Sandisk SSDs share similar speeds. The difference between brands is probably down to the use of different controllers. Even then, the difference won't be noticeable during real world usage, which is probably why Apple uses SSDs with variable speeds; The difference won't matter for most consumers. If anything, the difference would probably be noticeable if all a user does is transfer large files all day. The random read/write speeds (not the sustained ones you are focusing on) are important too, though I don't know the figures off the top of my head. Ultimately, it's up to you to do something if you feel hard done by it, or if you know that you're going to lose sleep over it.

My advice: considering this is the second thread you've made in relation in to this topic today, you'd be best served doing an exchange or return. You should also check for those display issues people here complain about.
Thank you. Your input has been really helpful. I think I am going to visit the store just to see what options I have.
 

jackchew21

macrumors newbie
Jan 22, 2014
1
0
There are two sources for 256GB SSD on our Retina 13".

I, unfortunately, got the SanDisk one and my Write speed 550MB/s is 150MBs slower than what the Samsung one gets according to BlackMagic Design Disk Test.

I would like to know what other SanDisk SSD MacBook Retina 13" owners are getting for their Write Speed. Is SanDisk SD0256F consistently 150MB/s slower than Samsung SM0256F counterpart?

Here is a great benchmark that includes both drives and also other MacBook Pro SSD options (512, 1024, etc).

http://www.harddrivebenchmark.net/ssd.html


Appreciate any inputs, thank you!

I got the same issues over here. Let us know if Apple able to do something about this :D
 

Attachments

alphaod

macrumors Core
Feb 9, 2008
22,047
1,104
NYC
It's all fast. That's all that should matter.

Yes the Samsung is the fastest.

Oh the 1TB is drive is even faster still; only comes in the Samsung version, so it's hard to compare to others.
 

nhhc

macrumors newbie
Original poster
Jan 21, 2014
23
0
It's all fast. That's all that should matter.

Yes the Samsung is the fastest.

Oh the 1TB is drive is even faster still; only comes in the Samsung version, so it's hard to compare to others.
Yes I agree it's already faster than old models but if we are paying the same dollars as other MBP owners with Samsung SSD, then it feels really terrible knowing that you could have gotten the same one.

As far as I know, a person with the same spec as mine got a Samsung version and he ordered just ten days before me. so I would really like to know if it's possible to catch good luck as it seems to be totally random. i hope they let you specify.
 

iizmoo

macrumors 6502
Jan 8, 2014
261
34
Write speed is not that important, read speed is. The test is also doing sequential read/write, which while it look nice, is also useless for actual usage that's more dependent on random I/O. Without knowing random I/O performance, it's not really a real difference.
 

UBS28

macrumors 65816
Oct 2, 2012
1,020
320
The 2012 rMBP had issues with the Sandisk SSD. So I would go for a Samsung SSD just to be safe :)
 

nhhc

macrumors newbie
Original poster
Jan 21, 2014
23
0
PS if it helps, my drive was completely empty after a fresh install (no preloaded bloatware like iWork and iLife).
i did a test on my 256GB SanDisk on rMBP 13 (late model). It is not the Samsung 256GB mind you.

I did it after installing of iWork, iMovie, iPhoto, and garage band. iWork is very small at about 1GB at the most. All these apps only take up no more than 5GB as I calculated.

Realizing the app installation may have impacted the hard drive performance, i removed these apps and ran the test again.

The result is about the same.

I don't know iLife because i did not install it. But just to comment on that previous comment, iWork should not play a significant role in hard drive testing if you are using BlackMagic Design Disk Test like the screen shot.
 

fskywalker

macrumors 65816
Nov 6, 2009
1,223
3
PS if it helps, my drive was completely empty after a fresh install (no preloaded bloatware like iWork and iLife).
I'm getting 976 write 881 read MB/s with 545gb of data in my drive, all apps closed:



Not bad at all, but lower than your results. Can you re-run it with your apps and data already installed to make a better comparisson?
 
Last edited:

yjchua95

macrumors 604
Apr 23, 2011
6,725
230
GVA, KUL, MEL (current), ZQN
i did a test on my 256GB SanDisk on rMBP 13 (late model). It is not the Samsung 256GB mind you.

I did it after installing of iWork, iMovie, iPhoto, and garage band. iWork is very small at about 1GB at the most. All these apps only take up no more than 5GB as I calculated.

Realizing the app installation may have impacted the hard drive performance, i removed these apps and ran the test again.

The result is about the same.

I don't know iLife because i did not install it. But just to comment on that previous comment, iWork should not play a significant role in hard drive testing if you are using BlackMagic Design Disk Test like the screen shot.
iLife means GarageBand, iMovie and iPhoto combined.
 

alphaod

macrumors Core
Feb 9, 2008
22,047
1,104
NYC
While we're all comparing our 1TB drives, here's mine with just about everything on my computer working and FileVault (drive encryption) turned on:
Screen Shot 2014-01-25 at 8.23.37 AM.png

Yes I agree it's already faster than old models but if we are paying the same dollars as other MBP owners with Samsung SSD, then it feels really terrible knowing that you could have gotten the same one.

As far as I know, a person with the same spec as mine got a Samsung version and he ordered just ten days before me. so I would really like to know if it's possible to catch good luck as it seems to be totally random. i hope they let you specify.
That's the problem a lot people have. They think it matters much on paper, but can you really tell the difference?
 

nhhc

macrumors newbie
Original poster
Jan 21, 2014
23
0
Yes, same as the screen lotery with the Samsung / LG variants.
Samsung 256GB people do you mind sharing the part number listed on the label on the back of the box/package?

I compared my SD 256 with another owner's SM 256 and we noticed a few digits are off in the part number (not serial number). We both have the same 256GB with 16GB upgrade. So the only difference between ours is the SSD.

----------

While we're all comparing our 1TB drives, here's mine with just about everything on my computer working and FileVault (drive encryption) turned on:
View attachment 458072



That's the problem a lot people have. They think it matters much on paper, but can you really tell the difference?
If I paid $500 dollars for the macbook I would have probably let it go. But this is a $1600 item and it's VERY DIFFICULT not to examine every detail. I guess what I am trying to say is, I hope others have more empathy.

Sure the the software only tested one aspect of the SSD performance. But I also looked at other tests done and Samsung one still shows better OVERALL performance than SanDisk. The key difference is likely the controller IC (read up on SandForce/LSI vs Marvell vs BigFoot from OCZ).
 

maflynn

Moderator
Staff member
May 3, 2009
63,851
30,367
Boston
If I paid $500 dollars for the macbook I would have probably let it go. But this is a $1600 item and it's VERY DIFFICULT not to examine every detail. I guess what I am trying to say is, I hope others have more empathy..
How slow are you talking about the SanDisk, a couple of miliseconds? Unless the performance is significant, I'd not worry about it.