Slashdot Mirror
Apple Doubles MacBook Pro R/W Performance
Lucas123 writes Benchmark tests performed on the 2015 MacBook Pro revealed it does have twice the read/write performance as the mid-2014 model. Tests performed with the Blackmagic benchmark tool revealed read/write speeds of more than 1,300MBps/1,400MBps, respectively. So what's changed? The new MacBook Pro does have a faster Intel dual-core i7 2.9GHz processor and 1866MHz LPDDR3) RAM, but the real performance gain is in the latest PCIe M.2 flash module. The 2014 model used a PCIe 2.0 x2 card and the 2015 model uses a PCIe 3.0 x4 (four I/O lanes) card. Twice the lanes, twice the speed. While Apple uses a proprietary flash card made by Samsung, Intel, Micron and SanDisk are all working on similar technology, so it's likely to soon wind up in high-end PCs.
I know it's a little late, but for your next apple purchase (if there is one) be sure to check:
http://buyersguide.macrumors.com/
They generally stay on top of most of the rumors surrounding new product launches. Well enough to know if it's worth waiting for a few months before buying the new model or holding out till the next big Apple event.
Pretty much.
M.2 slots and SSDs are now fairly common place in laptops.
For desktops, direct PCIe flash drives have been around for years. PCIe adapters also exist if you want to use an M.2 drive now and your motherboard doesn't have an M.2 slot. Newer desktop boards ship with SATA Express ports, and drives should show up this summer offering the speed benefits of M.2 (running off PCIe lanes) as well as the benefits of NVMe, along with the possibility of being thrown into RAID (depending on your controller, of course). Many newer boards also feature a M.2 slot if you hate cables or are very space constrained.
The blackmagic benchmark they did, I would assume, is from BlackMagic, the company that makes video recording/production products.
So I am guessing it is benchmarking how fast you can write uncompressed video to your SSD, which, outside of that task, is probably not a relevant workload test.
Nope, I can pretty much say you would get no benefit from the faster drive for transcoding. The cpu will be the limiter. You would see benefit for non-linear video editing where you are working with massive raw files but the conversion is going to be limited in other ways.
"Twice the lanes, twice the speed"...man someone doesnt understand the PCIe standard or how to do simple math. Its actually twice the lanes, FOUR* times the (theoretical) speed. 2x500MB/s vs 4x985MB/s * rounded up
The raw bandwidth available for transfers isn't doubled, it's quadrupled. PCIe 3.0 is twice as fast as PCIe 2.0, channel for channel, so the bandwidth would have doubled even if they had not added two more channels. They doubled it in two different ways at the same time.
That said, the old flash was probably not being that badly constricted by the older standard, and the current generation is only capable of twice the throughput. However, adding even more bandwidth than that is a nice bit of future-proofing and quite welcome.
How is the Riemann zeta function like Trump rallies? Both have an endless number of trivial zeros.
The terminology police hereby fine you for incorrect terms. There is no "SATA6". You probably mean SATA3, which is 6 Gbps.
Which in no way detracts from your point, which is entirely correct.
This is so wrong in so many ways.
Awesome furniture, accessories and cabinetry in Santa Rosa, CA: http://humanity-home.com/