You need to take into account that Blackmagic is only reading sequential read and write speeds, the iops and random read and write are far more important when it comes to the overall performance of an SSD.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
SSD SD0256F (SanDisk) vs SM0256F (Samsung)
- Thread starter nhhc
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
You need to take into account that Blackmagic is only reading sequential read and write speeds, the iops and random read and write are far more important when it comes to the overall performance of an SSD.
Absolutely, they should artificially slow down the Samsung models so everyone is equal!
No, they should get a better controller for the SanDisk ones.
Or maybe even put the pressure on SanDisk to produce SSDs that perform identically to the Samsung ones, or dump SanDisk straight away
Try buying a new car, easily 10% difference between the power outputs and efficiency of 2 different "identical" cars....
i got a replacement one from Apple today. Turned out to be another SanDisk. I think I am just gonna keep this. Sigh.
yes i understand the random write is more important. but the samsung one has just as good random write as the sandisk, if not better. there is a SSD ranking chart on a well-known SSD website and the samsung one is still ranked higher than sandisk one used by apple. and that was for the test result based on general performance.
yes i understand the random write is more important. but the samsung one has just as good random write as the sandisk, if not better. there is a SSD ranking chart on a well-known SSD website and the samsung one is still ranked higher than sandisk one used by apple. and that was for the test result based on general performance.
Fair enough, the thing is in real world usage you will hardly notice the difference anyway. My 2011 MBA has MUCH slower SSD speeds then the 2013 model but mine feels just as fast in practice.
I have a late 2011 MBP and fitted my own Samsung 840 EVO.
It's lightening fast to me and I only scored between 480/500 read & write.
I presume yours is "ssd on a chip" rather than in a drive bay so you are gaining
from that !!
I really can't see that as being a problem, I would be over the moon.
Remember a 5400rpm drive will be lucky to offer you speeds over 70mbs !
MM.
It's lightening fast to me and I only scored between 480/500 read & write.
I presume yours is "ssd on a chip" rather than in a drive bay so you are gaining
from that !!
I really can't see that as being a problem, I would be over the moon.
Remember a 5400rpm drive will be lucky to offer you speeds over 70mbs !
MM.
I've recently purchased two rMBPs. (Jumping over from Windows, although, my first computer I used had Mac OS System 7 ).
I bought a 2.4/8/256 rMBP on the 31/12/2013. It had the Part No. of ME865X/A. I never opened it, because I wasn't sure if 256 would be enough for storage. So I hesitated for around 15 days. I returned it to a local retailer (where I bought it from), and upped for the 512GB version, which has the Part No. of ME866X/A. I still haven't opened the 512GB either. It seems quite pricey for an extra 256GB (it's an extra AUD $350), so I'm thinking of just going with what I originally wanted, a 256GB model, maybe with a 16GB RAM custom build (w/ the extra $100 student gift card from Apple) - and going with a NAS/External drive RAID setup of some kind in the future.
Seems like Apple subtly moved to SanDisks for whatever reason (lower manufacturing costs? A heightened feud with Samsung? - I've read that Apple wants to move away from Samsung manufacturing their hardware in future iPhone releases).
Not that there seems like there's any significant difference between the SanDisk and Samsung sequential and random writes/reads for everyday usage, but just curious, are all 512GBs rocking Samsung SSDs? If so, what's their model number of the SSDs? Is there a way to tell if my initial 256GB model had a Samsung SSD (without opening the box)?
The reason why the 1TB PCI-e SSDs are faster than the 256 or 512GB PCI-e SSDs is because apparently there are four parallel lanes for the 1TB between the NAND Flash chips and the Controller on-board the PCI-e card 'The extra speed comes from having more flash chips on the card this a wider and faster path to flash memory from the controller. In the same way that a RAID array of rust based device is faster due to multiple channels used at the same time more flash devices means more parallel paths to flash.' Whereas the 512 and 256 have just 2 lanes for bandwidth - still super fast though.
I may just keep the 512. The extra RAM would probably cause me to have too many things open at once. At least with having a relatively large enough SSD, you won't have to worry about limiting what you store on your primary; for a long time to come.
).I bought a 2.4/8/256 rMBP on the 31/12/2013. It had the Part No. of ME865X/A. I never opened it, because I wasn't sure if 256 would be enough for storage. So I hesitated for around 15 days. I returned it to a local retailer (where I bought it from), and upped for the 512GB version, which has the Part No. of ME866X/A. I still haven't opened the 512GB either. It seems quite pricey for an extra 256GB (it's an extra AUD $350), so I'm thinking of just going with what I originally wanted, a 256GB model, maybe with a 16GB RAM custom build (w/ the extra $100 student gift card from Apple) - and going with a NAS/External drive RAID setup of some kind in the future.
Seems like Apple subtly moved to SanDisks for whatever reason (lower manufacturing costs? A heightened feud with Samsung? - I've read that Apple wants to move away from Samsung manufacturing their hardware in future iPhone releases).
Not that there seems like there's any significant difference between the SanDisk and Samsung sequential and random writes/reads for everyday usage, but just curious, are all 512GBs rocking Samsung SSDs? If so, what's their model number of the SSDs? Is there a way to tell if my initial 256GB model had a Samsung SSD (without opening the box)?
The reason why the 1TB PCI-e SSDs are faster than the 256 or 512GB PCI-e SSDs is because apparently there are four parallel lanes for the 1TB between the NAND Flash chips and the Controller on-board the PCI-e card 'The extra speed comes from having more flash chips on the card this a wider and faster path to flash memory from the controller. In the same way that a RAID array of rust based device is faster due to multiple channels used at the same time more flash devices means more parallel paths to flash.' Whereas the 512 and 256 have just 2 lanes for bandwidth - still super fast though.
I may just keep the 512. The extra RAM would probably cause me to have too many things open at once. At least with having a relatively large enough SSD, you won't have to worry about limiting what you store on your primary; for a long time to come.
I've recently purchased two rMBPs. (Jumping over from Windows, although, my first computer I used had Mac OS System 7
I bought a 2.4/8/256 rMBP on the 31/12/2013. It had the Part No. of ME865X/A. I never opened it, because I wasn't sure if 256 would be enough for storage. So I hesitated for around 15 days. I returned it to a local retailer (where I bought it from), and upped for the 512GB version, which has the Part No. of ME866X/A. I still haven't opened the 512GB either. It seems quite pricey for an extra 256GB (it's an extra AUD $350), so I'm thinking of just going with what I originally wanted, a 256GB model, maybe with a 16GB RAM custom build (w/ the extra $100 student gift card from Apple) - and going with a NAS/External drive RAID setup of some kind in the future.
Seems like Apple subtly moved to SanDisks for whatever reason (lower manufacturing costs? A heightened feud with Samsung? - I've read that Apple wants to move away from Samsung manufacturing their hardware in future iPhone releases).
Not that there seems like there's any significant difference between the SanDisk and Samsung sequential and random writes/reads for everyday usage, but just curious, are all 512GBs rocking Samsung SSDs? If so, what's their model number of the SSDs? Is there a way to tell if my initial 256GB model had a Samsung SSD (without opening the box)?
The reason why the 1TB PCI-e SSDs are faster than the 256 or 512GB PCI-e SSDs is because apparently there are four parallel lanes for the 1TB between the NAND Flash chips and the Controller on-board the PCI-e card 'The extra speed comes from having more flash chips on the card this a wider and faster path to flash memory from the controller. In the same way that a RAID array of rust based device is faster due to multiple channels used at the same time more flash devices means more parallel paths to flash.' Whereas the 512 and 256 have just 2 lanes for bandwidth - still super fast though.
I may just keep the 512. The extra RAM would probably cause me to have too many things open at once. At least with having a relatively large enough SSD, you won't have to worry about limiting what you store on your primary; for a long time to come.
I would suggest you return both an order one with 16GB Ram; the SSD you may replace later as it resides in a card, the RAM is soldered so no upgrade can be done in the future.
Yeah, I've thought about that too. Though, PCI-e SSDs are quite pricey at the moment, and look like they will remain that way for a few years. Also, the form-factor used in rMBP is different to normal PCI-e sized-cards seen in Desktops. I haven't seen any aftermarket PCI-e SSDs for the rMBP yet. Only talk of it.
Seriously, how much RAM can one possibly use? Some guy in another thread stress tested what 8GBs could do, and it honestly looks like more than enough for many years to come (My Desktop has 8GBs in it atm). Even if you use some of it as a RAM disk, there's not much benefit, since memory is volatile (You lose it all when the battery goes out) and the OS is auto-designed to maximise RAM usage as needed any ways, also the 350-1400MB/s SSDs pretty much mitigate the swap slowness (If any) encountered by previous 70-110MB/s HDDs.
No aftermarket rMBP SSD's yet, but you can buy the OEM ones in Ebay for about $1 per Gig (1 TB are about $900-1000)
So people take out their 1TB PCI-e SSDs and sell them? Or does a wholesaler have access to resell OEM drives alone?
Nope, places like OWC will come up with some custom-built PCIe SSDs just for Macs, and sell them at high prices.
Have seen individuals as well as Ebay stores selling them. I purchased last year a Samsung 512GB OEM SSD for my 15" rMBP and item came like new, with OS software pre-installed. I later sold it when upgraded to the 768GB max out version in Ebay as well for about what I paid for it 4 months earlier ($600ish).
Last edited:
Hmm, maybe I should opt for the 16GB RAM. My RAM usage tends to fluctuate normally around the 4-6GB mark at the moment (This is generally under a heavy load), and this is on Windows (without multiple Spaces/Desktops).
Going by this graph, 16GB doesn't seem so roomy in a few years (Especially with 4k about to make a mainstream entrance, and websites becoming ever more graphic intensive with auto-background videos playing). I presume Windows notebooks will start coming with 12GB RAM chips soon enough, and then eventually 16, but at the moment, 16GB seems to be a luxury.
If I hadn't run into this thread I wouldn't have bothered to check if I had Samsung or Sandisk XP
Now I see I have Sandisk, what is the average speed of these supposedly slower drives?
I'm getting
Write: 566.7MB/s
Read: 727.5 MB/s
Seems kind of stupid that there would be such a variance between them. As others have said, I would expect the best for my 1800$, not to say that Sandisk is "substandard" but... grrr frustration. I'm hoping that it might be a firmware issue, something that an update of Mavericks will be able to fix to some degree.
As mentioned if it's possible and affordable later on I'll consider a third party SSD which will hopefully have an awesome score. 256GB is feeling pretty tight, I ordered 16Gb ram because I knew I couldn't change it later, this I can change.
Until then, this SSD is still the fastest I've ever dealt with, boots, reads and writes are stupidly fast compared to anything else. The machine as a whole is still the same slim, lightweight beast. I'm happy with it
Now I see I have Sandisk, what is the average speed of these supposedly slower drives?
I'm getting
Write: 566.7MB/s
Read: 727.5 MB/s
Seems kind of stupid that there would be such a variance between them. As others have said, I would expect the best for my 1800$, not to say that Sandisk is "substandard" but... grrr frustration. I'm hoping that it might be a firmware issue, something that an update of Mavericks will be able to fix to some degree.
As mentioned if it's possible and affordable later on I'll consider a third party SSD which will hopefully have an awesome score. 256GB is feeling pretty tight, I ordered 16Gb ram because I knew I couldn't change it later, this I can change.
Until then, this SSD is still the fastest I've ever dealt with, boots, reads and writes are stupidly fast compared to anything else. The machine as a whole is still the same slim, lightweight beast. I'm happy with it
Last edited: