Timeline for SSD performance of different sizes
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
7 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jul 23, 2018 at 10:19 | comment | added | Monomeeth♦ | One thing I didn’t mention (and probably should have) is that latency can be an issue and this is something that could be affected by different capacities. That said, in real life usage these differences are rarely noticeable, unlike they are in benchmarks. Also, if higher capacity SSDs were significantly faster in Apple’s offerings, then I’m sure Apple would use that fact to try and upsell people to those higher capacities. It’s really just not the case here. | |
| Jul 23, 2018 at 10:19 | comment | added | Monomeeth♦ | I assume you’re talking about the different data transfer rates of the 256GB v 512GB Samsung 950 Pro series? Obviously I can’t comment on that specific series, nor how the tests were carried out, but I do note that in the other cases the size of SSDs do not seem to impact transfer speeds greatly, although there’s no Apple SSDs being tested. | |
| Jul 23, 2018 at 9:03 | comment | added | jimmy | Hmm.... do you know of any benchmarks to support your explanations? Because I found another "evidence" that different sizes result in different performance, 960 EVO and 960 Pro. | |
| Jul 23, 2018 at 0:53 | comment | added | Monomeeth♦ | For example, you'll always get better transfer speeds when transferring 1 x 5GB file as compared to transferring 500 x 10MB files (even though the overall amount of data being transferred is very similar). What other processes are running will also impact things, as will a user's software/hardware setup generally. My advice would be to get the largest size SSD you can afford, so long as you're allowing enough $ for external backup drives etc. Many will see the 512GB size as the sweet spot, but that's very subjective. | |
| Jul 23, 2018 at 0:53 | comment | added | Monomeeth♦ | Ok, well, there are a number of factors that will affect real life transfer speeds, but all things remaining equal should result in similar transfer speeds regardless of disk size. The only real advantage of more disk space from a speed perspective is that you're less likely to run low on space which can have a speed impact if/when you're low on RAM, as macOS can make more use of it. The various results you're seeing in the macrumors forum isn't all that surprising because you've got different users sharing their results, so none of these are in a controlled environment. | |
| Jul 22, 2018 at 17:42 | comment | added | jimmy | I'm asking because apparently some people report different speeds here: 2080 write and 2383 read for 512GB vs. 1400MB/s write and 2100MB/s read for 256GB. | |
| Jul 22, 2018 at 9:04 | history | answered | Monomeeth♦ | CC BY-SA 4.0 |