The interesting thing here is that I've been using my new MBP from time to time over my iPads cell connection. Page loads can be extremely fast even over LTE. So there is a significant impact, with respect to CPU speed, when it comes to rendering the pages you download. I know there are many trying to downplay the importance of CPU performance but I'd have to say they are mistaken, it is very important to the overall user experience.
I have performed that test too, and I recommend it to anyone who thinks everyday tasks are no longer CPU-bound in today's world. The test is: browse around the Internet on your iPhone for a while, then tether it to you Mac so that the Mac is accessing the Internet through the celluar connection, and browse the Internet on the Mac. It will be *way* snappier, on the same Internet connection. And another thing to ask yourself, if you believe web browsing can no longer be CPU bound, is why the various web browser vendors expend so much effort to squeeze every last drop of performance out of their Javascript engines.
The claim that we are past the point where CPU performance matters for most people was true a few years ago when everyone was using desktops and mobile devices had yet to take off, and it will be true again in a few more years, but it is not true right now.
I was surprised to see my sans-Retina MacBook Pro (13-inch, Mid 2012) supports NVMExpress. Good thing I haven't put an SSD in this thing yet, only 16 GB RAM.
What makes you think it does? Just because the NVMExpress appears on the left side panel of your system info? I think it appears for everyone and for most it says "You don't have any NVMe devices.." and will stay like that. :-(
First usage of chipsets supporting NVMe where from 2012 and I don't think they're baked in that early in MBP's. I'm pretty sure that even my mid-2014 MBP wouldn't support it...
NVMe is for PCIe, pre-Retina models used SATA. The SSD itself will need a compatible controller too so only new machines will have them.
That site points to PCIe3 accounting for the increase but it uses Broadwell, which is just PCIe2 so they either increased the lanes or it's down to the SSD design.
Intel has some awesome new NVM Express SSDs for the PC. The 750 Series gets 2400MB/s read and 1200MB/s write.
Another change in 10.10.3 is massively improved support for 3rd party 4k monitors. If you look at Apple's 4K support page, they used to list a small set of supported monitors, but now they just say with OS X Yosemite v10.10.3 "most" 4K SST and MST monitors are supported. https://support.apple.com/en-au/HT202856
Edit: also, something else I just noticed on the Apple 4K page - the Dell UP2715K 27-inch 5K display is now officially supported on the Mac Pro, so they don't have to be jealous of 5K iMac owners any more.
Regarding your Monitor comment. Does anyone know if you can actually get the full resolution on the new Mac Pro with this monitor now then? Amazon reviews seem out of date if that is the case quoting ... "On MacOS Yosemite 10.10.1 this monitor will offer UHD resolution = 3840x2160x60Hz.".
Regarding your Monitor comment. Does anyone know if you can actually get the full resolution on the new Mac Pro with this monitor now then? Amazon reviews seem out of date if that is the case quoting ... "On MacOS Yosemite 10.10.1 this monitor will offer UHD resolution = 3840x2160x60Hz.".
I'm sorry I don't actually have one to try.
The thing that surprised me about the Dell 5K inclusion is that Apple says it's supported on the Mac Pro *and* the Retina iMac (but no other Macs). But I thought it needed not only 2 Thunderbolt ports, but 2 Thunderbolt controllers, and only the Mac Pro has that.
What makes you think it does? Just because the NVMExpress appears on the left side panel of your system info? I think it appears for everyone and for most it says "You don't have any NVMe devices.." and will stay like that. :-(
First usage of chipsets supporting NVMe where from 2012 and I don't think they're baked in that early in MBP's. I'm pretty sure that even my mid-2014 MBP wouldn't support it...
That site points to PCIe3 accounting for the increase but it uses Broadwell, which is just PCIe2 so they either increased the lanes or it's down to the SSD design.
The only way to actually test it for me would be sticking a 2.5" Samsung XS1715 into a Mac and seeing what happens. From what I read, SATA and PCIe (and by extension NVMe) seem to use the same physical connector. That being said, it also depends on other factors like the SSD controller and OS support (in which case it's a solid yes).
However the Samsung XS1715 is so rare I can't find a site mentioning it anywhere bar some reviews and the OEM page for it. Couldn't find a site selling it. If I ever get my hands on one (a guy can dream ????) I expect my MacBook Pro (13 inch, mid 2012) to be either screaming fast at NVMe speeds (a little unlikely, I admit) or just blazing at standard SATA3 6Gbps speeds (which I know it supports).
Your SATA connector will always be limited to 6Gbps (750MB/s). NVMe allows up to 4GB/s. For most tasks, the speeds offered by normal SATA drives will be ok.
Your SATA connector will always be limited to 6Gbps (750MB/s). NVMe allows up to 4GB/s. For most tasks, the speeds offered by normal SATA drives will be ok.
Ah, I see. Thanks for the clarification. Then am I correct to assume that a Retina MacBook Pro running PCIe (ie. the 2013/2014 models) could take advantage of this (since they actually have the same physical connector)?
Ah, I see. Thanks for the clarification. Then am I correct to assume that a Retina MacBook Pro running PCIe (ie. the 2013/2014 models) could take advantage of this (since they actually have the same physical connector)?
You'd need a compatible SSD. If you took an SSD from a new model MBP and installed it in an older one, it would probably be supported but it also depends on PCIe lane allocation. Two PCIe 2 lanes can only give you 1GB/s. Late 2015 Macs using Skylake will use PCIe 3 with double the bandwidth per lane and it looks like the Broadwell models allocate more to the SSD. People have taken the SSD out of a Mac Pro and found it to be faster than the SSD in older rMBPs.
If Intel's 2015 3D NAND SSDs come out at $0.25/GB, I expect Apple to be able to switch over to them and be able to offer 1TB upgrades at much cheaper prices than now and potentially go to 2TB, even in the laptops (it might even drop the 12" MB price a bit). With PCIe 3, they might even be able to top 2GB/s speeds too.
You'd need a compatible SSD. If you took an SSD from a new model MBP and installed it in an older one, it would probably be supported but it also depends on PCIe lane allocation. Two PCIe 2 lanes can only give you 1GB/s. Late 2015 Macs using Skylake will use PCIe 3 with double the bandwidth per lane and it looks like the Broadwell models allocate more to the SSD. People have taken the SSD out of a Mac Pro and found it to be faster than the SSD in older rMBPs.
If Intel's 2015 3D NAND SSDs come out at $0.25/GB, I expect Apple to be able to switch over to them and be able to offer 1TB upgrades at much cheaper prices than now and potentially go to 2TB, even in the laptops (it might even drop the 12" MB price a bit). With PCIe 3, they might even be able to top 2GB/s speeds too.
Does that mean the recently updated 13" Retina MacBook Pro has the 3x PCIe interface since Apple touts them as having faster Flash? And does this mean they are already using NVMe SSDs?
Does that mean the recently updated 13" Retina MacBook Pro has the 3x PCIe interface since Apple touts them as having faster Flash? And does this mean they are already using NVMe SSDs?
The teardowns say they're using a Samsung drive (as they usually do) that doesn't support NVMe:
It must be down to its PCIe allocation. Some sites are saying it's now PCIe 3 x4 vs PCIe 2 x2 but that would mean 4x the bandwidth (up to 4GB/s) yet it doesn't benchmark that high. It only benchmarks similar to putting the Mac Pro SSD in a 2014 MBP where it just negotiated PCIe 2 x4, doubling bandwidth:
Comments
The interesting thing here is that I've been using my new MBP from time to time over my iPads cell connection. Page loads can be extremely fast even over LTE. So there is a significant impact, with respect to CPU speed, when it comes to rendering the pages you download. I know there are many trying to downplay the importance of CPU performance but I'd have to say they are mistaken, it is very important to the overall user experience.
I have performed that test too, and I recommend it to anyone who thinks everyday tasks are no longer CPU-bound in today's world. The test is: browse around the Internet on your iPhone for a while, then tether it to you Mac so that the Mac is accessing the Internet through the celluar connection, and browse the Internet on the Mac. It will be *way* snappier, on the same Internet connection. And another thing to ask yourself, if you believe web browsing can no longer be CPU bound, is why the various web browser vendors expend so much effort to squeeze every last drop of performance out of their Javascript engines.
The claim that we are past the point where CPU performance matters for most people was true a few years ago when everyone was using desktops and mobile devices had yet to take off, and it will be true again in a few more years, but it is not true right now.
NVMe is for PCIe, pre-Retina models used SATA. The SSD itself will need a compatible controller too so only new machines will have them.
http://www.computerworld.com/article/2900330/holy-smoke-the-new-macbook-literally-is-twice-as-fast.html
That site points to PCIe3 accounting for the increase but it uses Broadwell, which is just PCIe2 so they either increased the lanes or it's down to the SSD design.
You wouldn't if you had to lift it!
Every time I move my new Mac Pro around in one hand my back thanks me for upgrading.
Regarding your Monitor comment. Does anyone know if you can actually get the full resolution on the new Mac Pro with this monitor now then? Amazon reviews seem out of date if that is the case quoting ... "On MacOS Yosemite 10.10.1 this monitor will offer UHD resolution = 3840x2160x60Hz.".
My chief concern with the CoreM in the new MacBook centers around the fact that it's not powerful enough to keep up with the display: http://arstechnica.com/apple/2015/04/the-2015-macbook-previews-a-future-thats-not-quite-here/3/#h2
Regarding your Monitor comment. Does anyone know if you can actually get the full resolution on the new Mac Pro with this monitor now then? Amazon reviews seem out of date if that is the case quoting ... "On MacOS Yosemite 10.10.1 this monitor will offer UHD resolution = 3840x2160x60Hz.".
I'm sorry I don't actually have one to try.
The thing that surprised me about the Dell 5K inclusion is that Apple says it's supported on the Mac Pro *and* the Retina iMac (but no other Macs). But I thought it needed not only 2 Thunderbolt ports, but 2 Thunderbolt controllers, and only the Mac Pro has that.
The only way to actually test it for me would be sticking a 2.5" Samsung XS1715 into a Mac and seeing what happens. From what I read, SATA and PCIe (and by extension NVMe) seem to use the same physical connector. That being said, it also depends on other factors like the SSD controller and OS support (in which case it's a solid yes).
However the Samsung XS1715 is so rare I can't find a site mentioning it anywhere bar some reviews and the OEM page for it. Couldn't find a site selling it. If I ever get my hands on one (a guy can dream ????) I expect my MacBook Pro (13 inch, mid 2012) to be either screaming fast at NVMe speeds (a little unlikely, I admit) or just blazing at standard SATA3 6Gbps speeds (which I know it supports).
Do 2013's rMBP's support NVMe?
No they don't.
It has extra parts on the connector:
http://www.thessdreview.com/our-reviews/samsung-xs1715/
It's also more like SAS than SATA:
NVMe / SFF-8639 (2.5 implementation):
Your SATA connector will always be limited to 6Gbps (750MB/s). NVMe allows up to 4GB/s. For most tasks, the speeds offered by normal SATA drives will be ok.
This is what's great about Apple, the CPU is one component, so if that is restricted in order to maximise efficiency then improve other components.
I think this MacBook is going to scream.
It has extra parts on the connector:
http://www.thessdreview.com/our-reviews/samsung-xs1715/
It's also more like SAS than SATA:
{image}
NVMe / SFF-8639 (2.5 implementation):
{image}
Your SATA connector will always be limited to 6Gbps (750MB/s). NVMe allows up to 4GB/s. For most tasks, the speeds offered by normal SATA drives will be ok.
Ah, I see. Thanks for the clarification. Then am I correct to assume that a Retina MacBook Pro running PCIe (ie. the 2013/2014 models) could take advantage of this (since they actually have the same physical connector)?
You'd need a compatible SSD. If you took an SSD from a new model MBP and installed it in an older one, it would probably be supported but it also depends on PCIe lane allocation. Two PCIe 2 lanes can only give you 1GB/s. Late 2015 Macs using Skylake will use PCIe 3 with double the bandwidth per lane and it looks like the Broadwell models allocate more to the SSD. People have taken the SSD out of a Mac Pro and found it to be faster than the SSD in older rMBPs.
If Intel's 2015 3D NAND SSDs come out at $0.25/GB, I expect Apple to be able to switch over to them and be able to offer 1TB upgrades at much cheaper prices than now and potentially go to 2TB, even in the laptops (it might even drop the 12" MB price a bit). With PCIe 3, they might even be able to top 2GB/s speeds too.
You'd need a compatible SSD. If you took an SSD from a new model MBP and installed it in an older one, it would probably be supported but it also depends on PCIe lane allocation. Two PCIe 2 lanes can only give you 1GB/s. Late 2015 Macs using Skylake will use PCIe 3 with double the bandwidth per lane and it looks like the Broadwell models allocate more to the SSD. People have taken the SSD out of a Mac Pro and found it to be faster than the SSD in older rMBPs.
If Intel's 2015 3D NAND SSDs come out at $0.25/GB, I expect Apple to be able to switch over to them and be able to offer 1TB upgrades at much cheaper prices than now and potentially go to 2TB, even in the laptops (it might even drop the 12" MB price a bit). With PCIe 3, they might even be able to top 2GB/s speeds too.
Does that mean the recently updated 13" Retina MacBook Pro has the 3x PCIe interface since Apple touts them as having faster Flash? And does this mean they are already using NVMe SSDs?
The teardowns say they're using a Samsung drive (as they usually do) that doesn't support NVMe:
https://www.ifixit.com/Teardown/MacBook+Pro+13-Inch+Retina+Display+Early+2015+Teardown/38300
It must be down to its PCIe allocation. Some sites are saying it's now PCIe 3 x4 vs PCIe 2 x2 but that would mean 4x the bandwidth (up to 4GB/s) yet it doesn't benchmark that high. It only benchmarks similar to putting the Mac Pro SSD in a 2014 MBP where it just negotiated PCIe 2 x4, doubling bandwidth:
http://blog.macsales.com/25878-owc-gets-1200mbs-from-ssd-in-2014-macbook-pro-with-retina-display
It's the following drive they're using:
http://www.anandtech.com/show/8979/samsung-sm951-512-gb-review
Samsung makes NVMe drives for enterprise that exceed 3GB/s so maybe once they start using it in consumer drives, performance will improve further.