tipoo said: As mentioned above, even the 2014 and 2015 got that much. So it's impressive that the 13" now matches it, but it doesn't beat it by 11K vs 16K.
Yeah, but matches is still pretty darn impressive... especially when we were being told (by some) that putting these new chips in would result in little to no improvement.
Impressive, been thinking of getting a MBP since a lot of years, I guess this one could be the one.
Just don't get the one with touch-bar. You will be annoyed with it!
Yeah, they didn't fix everything.... but you don't want the non-touch-bar one if you care about any of these performance improvements. The non-touch-bar one is a very different machine (unless I'm misunderstanding).
It's more like I think maybe I can put-up with the TouchBar to get the rest.
This confirms something I've thought but the opposite keeps getting repeated online. The dual SSD modules in the iMac Pro aren't a RAID, because there's only one drive controller, the T2's real time encryption by itself makes for this speed, as the Macbook Pros now do this with a single bank of NAND.
Yeah, but matches is still pretty darn impressive... especially when we were being told (by some) that putting these new chips in would result in little to no improvement.
It is impressive, but my point was their score for the top end 2016 15" is wrong, it shouldn't be 11K unless something went wrong.
Anyone who said that doubling the core count would result in a small improvement was smoking it lol
This confirms something I've thought but the opposite keeps getting repeated online. The dual SSD modules in the iMac Pro aren't a RAID, because there's only one drive controller, the T2's real time encryption by itself makes for this speed, as the Macbook Pros now do this with a single bank of NAND.
It's admittedly been a long time since I've had to deal with this stuff, but I thought that the key difference between either RAID v RAID 1 or RAID 1 v RAID 2 was that the single v dual controllers dictated what kind of RAID it could be.
Sp why, for instance, can't it write to each SSD modules at the same time, effectively making it a RAID 0 setup which would double the read/write speed?
tipoo said: It is impressive, but my point was their score for the top end 2016 15" is wrong, it shouldn't be 11K unless something went wrong.
Anyone who said that doubling the core count would result in a small improvement was smoking it lol
Yeah. To give them the benefit of the doubt, they were possibly focusing on single-core performance. But, most people benefit from the move from 2 to 4 cores, unless they do very simple stuff. 6 cores is even better (or more) if you're a pro, but 2 cores was fairly unacceptable (especially when even entry-level Apple computers used to have 4).
But, whether they knew what they were talking about or not, if you go back a month or two in these forums, they were full of comments about how Apple hadn't updated the laptops because there were no performance gains to be had (their hands were tied by Intel).
This confirms something I've thought but the opposite keeps getting repeated online. The dual SSD modules in the iMac Pro aren't a RAID, because there's only one drive controller, the T2's real time encryption by itself makes for this speed, as the Macbook Pros now do this with a single bank of NAND.
It's admittedly been a long time since I've had to deal with this stuff, but I thought that the key difference between either RAID v RAID 1 or RAID 1 v RAID 2 was that the single v dual controllers dictated what kind of RAID it could be.
Sp why, for instance, can't it write to each SSD modules at the same time, effectively making it a RAID 0 setup which would double the read/write speed?
I don't think so, as you can even have software RAID. It's more about how the data is distributed between storage units and how failures are handled. But, yes, some RAID units have separate controllers, so there could be speed gains there (aside from the fact that more high-end RAID units have specialized high-performance controllers and caching, etc.).
1- Same amount of USB-C ports. If one is used for charging, and another for an external monitor that leaves you with only 2 ports... 2- Still no Mag-Safe (one of the best features ever on a Macbook). 3- One of the worst features: Both the RAM and the HD are soldered into the Logic board, making it A NON UPGRADABLE MACBOOK, in addition that repairs are more difficult to do. 4- Due to the poor design, if the Logic board dies, you might lose all your data. 5- Same keyboard, which the feel is so bad compared to the old Macbooks (pre 2015). 6- The entry level ships with a 256 internal SSD. Really? Is this suppose to be a so called "Pro" Macbook...? 7- Way overpriced.
1- Same amount of USB-C ports. If one is used for charging, and another for an external monitor that leaves you with only 2 ports... 2- Still no Mag-Safe (one of the best features ever on a Macbook). 3- One of the worst features: Both the RAM and the HD are soldered into the Logic board, making it A NON UPGRADABLE MACBOOK, in addition that repairs are more difficult to do. 4- Due to the poor design, if the Logic board dies, you might lose all your data. 5- Same keyboard, which the feel is so bad compared to the old Macbooks (pre 2015). 6- The entry level ships with a 256 internal SSD. Really? Is this suppose to be a so called "Pro" Macbook...? 7- Way overpriced.
So, you're looking for a review that already agrees with your pre-conceived notions of a product you haven't used?
And, a motherboard replacement on the 2016-2018 13-inch MBP is LOADS easier than it was on a Pismo, Wallstreet, PowerBook G4, first generation MacBook Pro, or unibody, so you can scratch that one off the list.
Mike Wuerthele said: And, a motherboard replacement on the 2016-2018 13-inch MBP is LOADS easier than it was on a Pismo, Wallstreet, PowerBook G4, first generation MacBook Pro, or unibody, so you can scratch that one off the list.
I suppose overall it isn't worth it?... but you could 'upgrade' a MBP by having Apple swap in a motherboard with more RAM and/or storage?
You had under 700 for the 256GB SSD internal, did you confirm this?
Thanks
That's last years 2017 non-touch bar.
Our 2018 13" Touch Bar MacBook Pro with 256GB SSD got 1151 Write speed. The reason it's faster on the 1TB is because it probably uses 2x 512GB SSD's in RAID 0 to double the speed. (Not 100% sure though)
Edit: They actually duplicated the files, so that crazy speed is actually due to the APFS file system.
This is from a test of the iMacPro from ARS.... The T2 not the CPU handles the SDD.
"Note also that the iMac Pro actually has two SSDs working together, controlled by the T2 chip. It's an unusual solution, but it works well." - ARS
It very well appears that the 2018 MBP numbers could be correct... if the 2018 15" 512GB SSD is two 256GB SSD working together!
When SSDs are in RAID, each bank of NAND has its own controller. The iMac Pro had two banks of NAND, but connected to one T2 controller, so it's more like a physically split single SSD. The results are great regardless, but not what you would see with RAID 0, this seems a misconception that never got corrected online, the uplift is probably from T2 real time encryption.
And the split SSD design doesn't seem suited for a space constrained laptop, but we'll see with the teardown!
The System Information should said something about it. Also here's something interesting, check out the screenshot from the iFixit video:
Notice there are some sockets left unused, which I suspect they are for NANDs. If this is true, it's very similar to what iMac Pro did -- although not going to give any advantage compared to it, if T2 doesn't do RAID 0.
This confirms something I've thought but the opposite keeps getting repeated online. The dual SSD modules in the iMac Pro aren't a RAID, because there's only one drive controller, the T2's real time encryption by itself makes for this speed, as the Macbook Pros now do this with a single bank of NAND.
It's admittedly been a long time since I've had to deal with this stuff, but I thought that the key difference between either RAID v RAID 1 or RAID 1 v RAID 2 was that the single v dual controllers dictated what kind of RAID it could be.
Sp why, for instance, can't it write to each SSD modules at the same time, effectively making it a RAID 0 setup which would double the read/write speed?
This confirms something I've thought but the opposite keeps getting repeated online. The dual SSD modules in the iMac Pro aren't a RAID, because there's only one drive controller, the T2's real time encryption by itself makes for this speed, as the Macbook Pros now do this with a single bank of NAND.
It's admittedly been a long time since I've had to deal with this stuff, but I thought that the key difference between either RAID v RAID 1 or RAID 1 v RAID 2 was that the single v dual controllers dictated what kind of RAID it could be.
Sp why, for instance, can't it write to each SSD modules at the same time, effectively making it a RAID 0 setup which would double the read/write speed?
Or anyone thought they could put two SSD controller on a single die? Just a theory.
I asked about that very thing several years ago in regards to iOS devices with soldered NAND on the logic board. This was well before Apple had moved to soldering their SSDs to their logic board, but I think it was safer they started using PCIe-like socketed SSDs. I see absolutely no reason why they couldn't do this for every device that has more than one NAND module if the cost made it viable.
Perhaps that's what's they're doing with the T2 for controlling the SSD as that could potentially have more than controller built into a single chip… or maybe the SSD controller is separate and the T2 is only being used for security. I don't feel like we really know the whole story about the T2 at this point.
This confirms something I've thought but the opposite keeps getting repeated online. The dual SSD modules in the iMac Pro aren't a RAID, because there's only one drive controller, the T2's real time encryption by itself makes for this speed, as the Macbook Pros now do this with a single bank of NAND.
It's admittedly been a long time since I've had to deal with this stuff, but I thought that the key difference between either RAID v RAID 1 or RAID 1 v RAID 2 was that the single v dual controllers dictated what kind of RAID it could be.
Sp why, for instance, can't it write to each SSD modules at the same time, effectively making it a RAID 0 setup which would double the read/write speed?
Or anyone thought they could put two SSD controller on a single die? Just a theory.
I asked about that very thing several years ago in regards to iOS devices with soldered NAND on the logic board. This was well before Apple had moved to soldering their SSDs to their logic board, but I think it was safer they started using PCIe-like socketed SSDs. I see absolutely no reason why they couldn't do this for every device that has more than one NAND module if the cost made it viable.
Perhaps that's what's they're doing with the T2 for controlling the SSD as that could potentially have more than controller built into a single chip… or maybe the SSD controller is separate and the T2 is only being used for security. I don't feel like we really know the whole story about the T2 at this point.
When iMac Pro cames out, someone put a block diagram about it. We can have a sneak peek about the T2. Not much, but still. See the Flash Storage 00 and 01. That kinda sounds like "RAID" to me. Overall though, I think the System Information will have an actual report on whether the SSD is in RAID.
Looks like doesn't list any, therefore probably not RAID (at least not in the traditional sense). I wonder what's the speed difference between RAID 0 and T2?
Comments
Dave Lee testing the 15":
Yeah, they didn't fix everything.... but you don't want the non-touch-bar one if you care about any of these performance improvements. The non-touch-bar one is a very different machine (unless I'm misunderstanding).
It's more like I think maybe I can put-up with the TouchBar to get the rest.
It is impressive, but my point was their score for the top end 2016 15" is wrong, it shouldn't be 11K unless something went wrong.
Anyone who said that doubling the core count would result in a small improvement was smoking it lol
Sp why, for instance, can't it write to each SSD modules at the same time, effectively making it a RAID 0 setup which would double the read/write speed?
But, whether they knew what they were talking about or not, if you go back a month or two in these forums, they were full of comments about how Apple hadn't updated the laptops because there were no performance gains to be had (their hands were tied by Intel).
1- Same amount of USB-C ports. If one is used for charging, and another for an external monitor that leaves you with only 2 ports...
2- Still no Mag-Safe (one of the best features ever on a Macbook).
3- One of the worst features: Both the RAM and the HD are soldered into the Logic board, making it A NON UPGRADABLE MACBOOK, in addition that repairs are more difficult to do.
4- Due to the poor design, if the Logic board dies, you might lose all your data.
5- Same keyboard, which the feel is so bad compared to the old Macbooks (pre 2015).
6- The entry level ships with a 256 internal SSD. Really? Is this suppose to be a so called "Pro" Macbook...?
7- Way overpriced.
Shame Apple...
And, a motherboard replacement on the 2016-2018 13-inch MBP is LOADS easier than it was on a Pismo, Wallstreet, PowerBook G4, first generation MacBook Pro, or unibody, so you can scratch that one off the list.
Notice there are some sockets left unused, which I suspect they are for NANDs. If this is true, it's very similar to what iMac Pro did -- although not going to give any advantage compared to it, if T2 doesn't do RAID 0.
Perhaps that's what's they're doing with the T2 for controlling the SSD as that could potentially have more than controller built into a single chip… or maybe the SSD controller is separate and the T2 is only being used for security. I don't feel like we really know the whole story about the T2 at this point.
See the Flash Storage 00 and 01. That kinda sounds like "RAID" to me. Overall though, I think the System Information will have an actual report on whether the SSD is in RAID.
Edit: https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/imac-pro-raid-with-1-tb-machine.2103172/
Looks like doesn't list any, therefore probably not RAID (at least not in the traditional sense). I wonder what's the speed difference between RAID 0 and T2?