|
nitsuga posted:I’m thinking about getting an SSD for my 2012 MacBook Pro. Would it be worth going with the MX over the BX drives As others have mentioned, it'd probably be a good idea to get as much storage for the buck as possible. If you ever plan on going to Mojave or (shudder) Catalina, those OSes eat up a good amount of space just for the system itself. Also, if I were you, I would maybe get either the Samsung or the SanDisk models as some folks have run into issues with upgrading their BootROM / firmware with no-names. The reason for this is that the OS installers actually check the ID of the storage that is being used and based on that, also insert into the install process a routine that upgrades the BootROM, but it will not upgrade the BootROM if it sees a vendor ID that Apple doesn't normally use. Apple uses Toshiba, Samsung, and SanDisk SSDs in their products (albeit OEM'd and modified by Apple to be compatible) so people tend to have more success with those makes. I recently installed one of these for a client with a non-Retina 2012 MBP (the Retina 2012 is the start of when Apple decided to use their wacky proprietary M.2 form factor which is merely them loving around switching the pins, you can buy adapters that let you use regular M.2 form factor SSDs with the firmware caveat mentioned) and it seems to be fine: https://www.microcenter.com/product/508183/1tb-ssd-3d-nand-sata-iii-6gb-s-25-internal-solid-state-drive 1 TB for $80. Need to check on the firmware issue but that client already had the latest BootROM due to being at the newest Mojave. The Crucial probably isn't a bad deal but they're not known for being Mac-friendly. Binary Badger fucked around with this message at 15:56 on Sep 21, 2019 |
#
?
Sep 21, 2019 15:54
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 25, 2024 21:03 |
|
|
Binary Badger posted:(the Retina 2012 is the start of when Apple decided to use their wacky proprietary M.2 form factor which is merely them loving around switching the pins, you can buy adapters that let you use regular M.2 form factor SSDs with the firmware caveat mentioned) lol apple
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2019 16:34
|
|
|
That article is more about the fact that since the 2016 models, Apple has chosen to put the SSD on their logic board in the form of NAND chips. So on any Mac laptop released since 2016, there is no option to use M.2 or other SSD to upgrade- you must ask for the amount of SSD storage you want and then that's what you have for the life of that laptop. At last look, on a 15-inch rMBP, no charge for 512 GB, but they want $200 for 1 TB, $600 for 2 TB, and $1400 for 4 TB NAND installed on the logic board. The only benefit to this is that the NAND is controlled by the T2 chip, so encryption is instantaneous and it accelerates most built-in SSD functions.
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2019 17:21
|
|
|
Not just fanbois, but the tech/change avoidant as well. loving kills me. Had a coworker request a iMac this week and it was $400 to upgrade to a 256GB SSD and 16GB of memory. I almost feel bad for someone who bought into the Mac ecosystem when it was a reasonable value proposition and Apple gave a poo poo about the destkop realm
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2019 17:24
|
|
Boys who love boys
|
Binary Badger posted:The only benefit to this is that the NAND is controlled by the T2 chip, so encryption is instantaneous and it accelerates most built-in SSD functions. It's just an SSD controller. They pretty much all do instant encryption if they support TCG Opal/eDrive.
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2019 17:31
|
|
|
Binary Badger posted:The only benefit to this is that the NAND is controlled by the T2 chip, so encryption is instantaneous and it accelerates most built-in SSD functions. Most SSD controllers do encryption for free, and there are a number of standards to let the operating system take advantage of that, eg: bitlocker can use the SSD controller for encryption. The major difference from Apple is that many controller makers are terrible at security and the encryption key can be trivially recovered if you have physical access to the device.
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2019 17:52
|
|
|
Apple could go with an m.2 NVMe format, if expandability were one of their design goals even while using their own in-house controller.EoRaptor posted:and there are a number of standards to let the operating system take advantage of that, eg: bitlocker can use the SSD controller for encryption. TCG Opal/eDrive is that standard.
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2019 19:01
|
|
|
Are those Inlands decent? I know there are better ones, but it’d probably work all right.
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2019 03:17
|
|
|
EoRaptor posted:Most SSD controllers do encryption for free, and there are a number of standards to let the operating system take advantage of that, eg: bitlocker can use the SSD controller for encryption. The major difference from Apple is that many controller makers are terrible at security and the encryption key can be trivially recovered if you have physical access to the device. it's highly disingenuous to say "the drive does if for free" when most drive manufacturers have been proven to be using faulty and incompetent crypto schemes
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2019 03:41
|
|
|
Lutha Mahtin posted:it's highly disingenuous to say "the drive does if for free" when most drive manufacturers have been proven to be using faulty and incompetent crypto schemes You get what you pay for.
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2019 03:43
|
|
|
In the end, it doesn't matter: Not going with m.2 was a design decision, because they didn't deem replaceability necessary. They could roll their own crypto either way. But Apple doesn't have the greatest track record with file system encryption, either. Lambert fucked around with this message at 12:20 on Sep 22, 2019 |
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2019 11:37
|
|
|
EoRaptor posted:You get what you pay for. 
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2019 18:22
|
|
|
EoRaptor posted:You get what you pay for. I kind of bristle at these comments because security is something a lot of big enterprise customers care about and do ask and pay for via product requirements and sessions where they beat up on some poor customer engineer and verify with their own quals. Now companies can do a really bad job at it and not know what they are doing when they try (or just do a quick hack job in some low margin client drive so YOLO), but the implication that there is no focus or effort or customer ask on it or someone won't get bitched out for loving something up is false. WhyteRyce fucked around with this message at 22:52 on Sep 23, 2019 |
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2019 22:43
|
|
|
So here's something new: I was playing Battlefield 1 on my PC, and all of a sudden the whole computer completely freezes and I had to force a shutdown by holding the power button. When I restarted, my main SSD (Crucial MX500 in the m2 slot) was not recognized anymore, and since this is where Windows is installed (aswell as my current ~gamez~) I was unable to boot up. However, after waiting for 30 minutes, everything was okay again. Anybody knows what could have happened here? SSD just overheating? Or did I buy a lemon and should find a replacement ASAP?
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2019 08:40
|
|
|
Chikimiki posted:So here's something new: I was playing Battlefield 1 on my PC, and all of a sudden the whole computer completely freezes and I had to force a shutdown by holding the power button. Might want to try a different SATA cable before you return the drive.
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2019 08:45
|
|
|
TOOT BOOT posted:Might want to try a different SATA cable before you return the drive. He said it's in the M2 slot, there's no cable to swap. Maybe check the SMART data to see if it's reporting any errors? I haven't heard of the MX500 firmware being buggy yet, and SSDs are supposed to be fine with running hot. Don't know if there's an actual issue here or just getting struck by a magic bit flip.
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2019 09:06
|
|
|
TOOT BOOT posted:Might want to try a different SATA cable before you return the drive. Would if I could, but it's in the M2 slot of the motherboard (Asus Z170 mini-ITX). I'll admit that there is some pressure on the SSD when I put in the mounitng screw, but otherwise it would stick out at an angle  isndl posted:He said it's in the M2 slot, there's no cable to swap. Maybe check the SMART data to see if it's reporting any errors? I haven't heard of the MX500 firmware being buggy yet, and SSDs are supposed to be fine with running hot. Don't know if there's an actual issue here or just getting struck by a magic bit flip. Thanks, I'll try the SMART. Hopefully it's just some one of a kind computer magic trick 
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2019 09:06
|
|
|
nitsuga posted:Are those Inlands decent? I know there are better ones, but it’d probably work all right. Which Inland drives? I've been getting more and more Inland Pro SSDs from Amazon and (mostly) Micro Center. We've had zero issues with them, so far. The only things I could see being a problem with them is that their SMART info is hilariously bare, and there seems to be zero support from the manufacturer (I don't think they even have a product page for them). Then again, I haven't had any real issues with any SSD in probably 5 years. For our users with 24/7 workstations or "gotta be the best", I had been recommending the 850/860/970 PRO. For the standard systems, 850/860 EVO. I also started recommending the Crucial MX500 line as "should be good as Samsung, but cheaper". For the older systems, or when a user wants the cheapest, I recommend Inland Pro. Super cheap and seem to work fine, but long-term reliability is still unknown.
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2019 15:20
|
|
|
Intel announced the p665, same controller, 30-50% faster NAND https://www.anandtech.com/show/14908/intel-announces-ssd-665p-denser-faster-qlc-nand
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2019 08:36
|
|
|
That looks like a nice improvement, but I'm still going to recommend the 2 TB 660p for the value/capacity proposition unless the 665p comes even cheaper. A 4 TB variant would also be sweet!
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2019 23:21
|
|
|
Here's to hoping 660p prices just tank. Can't wait to get rid of SATA cables once and for all.
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2019 23:41
|
|
|
Seamonster posted:Here's to hoping 660p prices just tank. Can't wait to get rid of SATA cables once and for all. Your monkey paw wish results in everyone moving to U.2
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2019 23:52
|
|
|
Tower o Gen4 NVMe SSDs  (Yea cable -> slot -> aic -> m.2 perhaps not the efficient  )Also these phison E16 controllers kinda suck, speed wise. The E18 should be better.
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2019 00:20
|
|
|
why the gently caress are you doing that?!
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2019 00:29
|
|
|
Device testing, it is just a test setup to run some IOs thru. It is by no means a production setup! Can also use u.2 to m.2 adapters but requires a bit more configuration. Need Gen4 u.2 drives already 
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2019 00:39
|
|
|
Are the drives actually negotiating a gen4 link? I thought gen4 was too finicky to run through risers.
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2019 00:44
|
|
|
repiv posted:Are the drives actually negotiating a gen4 link? I thought gen4 was too finicky to run through risers. Yep no problem. The oculink and slot adapters are fairly low loss high quality and the aic to m.2 is just an off the shelf asus one that the traces are reasonably short on. The eye diagrams look very decent.
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2019 00:54
|
|
|
priznat posted:Tower o Gen4 NVMe SSDs Do you work at Linus tech tips
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2019 02:00
|
|
|
Bob Morales posted:Do you work at Linus tech tips God no, and ouch
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2019 02:11
|
|
|
My current setup is an Intel 660p 2 TB with an old 1TB Samsung 830 (I think) Evo. I'm thinking of eventually making my main drive some other NVMe 2TB drive so I can ditch the Samsung and my spare HDD as well. Was the Inland Professional series a good choice?
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2019 02:29
|
|
|
It seems like QLC NVME drives are about the same price/GB as cheap TLC SATA drives. Which one would be better for installing games on?
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2019 02:36
|
|
|
Either will be fine. I would hold off on QLC until it matures a bit more but that's more of a general personal opinion regards to early adoption/shakedown period. Both tends to bottle neck a little as the CPU has to decompress the assets which is also why consoles are so bad at loading with their basement CPUs.
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2019 03:01
|
|
|
VostokProgram posted:It seems like QLC NVME drives are about the same price/GB as cheap TLC SATA drives. Which one would be better for installing games on? Mu. Games are usually straightforward read patterns and don't use the bandwidth of NVMe. Anything SSD is more or less equally good. QLC is a minus, but many of the cheapest TLC drives don't have dram. Both may have downsides if you move the drive to a different job in the future. Neither matters for games. If you have specific models or just a size you're considering it might be more helpful.
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2019 03:03
|
|
|
Endymion FRS MK1 posted:My current setup is an Intel 660p 2 TB with an old 1TB Samsung 830 (I think) Evo. I'm thinking of eventually making my main drive some other NVMe 2TB drive so I can ditch the Samsung and my spare HDD as well. Was the Inland Professional series a good choice? They are quite fine; they're a good value NVMe. Certainly anything will be an upgrade over an ancient 2D NAND SATA SSD. VostokProgram posted:It seems like QLC NVME drives are about the same price/GB as cheap TLC SATA drives. Which one would be better for installing games on? It's not going to matter either way for gaming. Technically the NVMe drives will have higher peak performance, but will be slower in a worst-case scenario. Also, QLC has lower endurance. But again, for gaming, you're not going to be able to tell the difference.
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2019 03:03
|
|
|
Always buy a DRAM drive. It's all too easy to spend too little and self own. I see it happen all the time.
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2019 03:14
|
|
|
Klyith posted:Mu. Games are usually straightforward read patterns and don't use the bandwidth of NVMe. Anything SSD is more or less equally good. I was looking at 1 and 2 TB drives, comparing the Intel 660p vs. basically everything else on pcpartpicker. I'm planning what I want for my next PC builld, for which I want a good nvme boot drive (probably a 970 evo) + 1-2 TB of cheap flash for games. Some models I was looking at: https://pcpartpicker.com/product/7MQG3C/intel-660p-series-2tb-m2-2280-solid-state-drive-ssdpeknw020t8x1 https://pcpartpicker.com/product/8gRFf7/sandisk-ultra-3d-2tb-25-solid-state-drive-sdssdh3-2t00-g25 https://pcpartpicker.com/product/Ks97YJ/adata-su800-2-tb-25-solid-state-drive-asu800ss-2tt-c https://pcpartpicker.com/product/nF8j4D/crucial-mx500-2tb-25-solid-state-drive-ct2000mx500ssd1 https://pcpartpicker.com/product/Mtprxr/western-digital-0-25-2000000rpm-internal-hard-drive-wds200t2b0a
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2019 08:14
|
|
|
VostokProgram posted:I was looking at 1 and 2 TB drives, comparing the Intel 660p vs. basically everything else on pcpartpicker. I'm planning what I want for my next PC builld, for which I want a good nvme boot drive (probably a 970 evo) + 1-2 TB of cheap flash for games. At 2TB the 660p is a very good deal for anyone that doesn't have write-heavy workloads (a games drive and almost all other average desktop user stuff are this). It's cheaper than everything else and it avoids the downsides of QLC by having a lot of cache and a lot of capacity to burn. At 1TB it's kinda meh, and the 500gb is not recommended. If you're still planning and not going to buy soon, intel is about to replace the 660p with a 665p that will be faster. The other 4 drives on that list are all roughly on par with each other -- and the sandisk and WD are AFAIK the exact same drive. All of those have been around for a while and haven't had any reliability horrors so far. So if you wanted SATA over NVMe (lack of NVMe slots or whatnot) I'd pick whichever you can get cheapest. Also btw the 970 Evo is crazy overpriced as are all samsungs. Get it if you're ok paying more for the name and rep, but there are other good options.
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2019 10:36
|
|
|
Klyith posted:At 2TB the 660p is a very good deal for anyone that doesn't have write-heavy workloads (a games drive and almost all other average desktop user stuff are this). It's cheaper than everything else and it avoids the downsides of QLC by having a lot of cache and a lot of capacity to burn. At 1TB it's kinda meh, and the 500gb is not recommended. What would you recommend as a cheaper alternative to the 970 Evo?
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2019 18:27
|
|
|
VostokProgram posted:What would you recommend as a cheaper alternative to the 970 Evo? https://www.microcenter.com/product/600422/1tb-ssd-3d-nand-m2-2280-pcie-nvme-30-x4-internal-solid-state-drive It's a Phison E12 drive, so there's a ton of unofficial support out there for F/W updates, and all of these Inland drives should have F/W 12.2 pre-loaded, so you don't have to deal with the destructive update from 11.x to 12.x.
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2019 20:54
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 25, 2024 21:03 |
|
|
if you have a microcenter locally that ^^^ is a great choice, otherwise I'm not 100% sold on inland myself. the HP EX950 is $135 on newegg, Adata XPG 8200 pro is $130 on rakuten. These 2 drives are both substantially identical, same SM controller, and have performance on almost the same level as a 970 Evo. HP EX920 is even cheaper, and while the performance is 1st gen NVMe level that's still fast. That's probably what I'd get at the 1TB size main TLC drive because I'm a cheap bastard and I don't run anything that can tell the difference between slow NVMe and fast NVMe. Klyith fucked around with this message at 21:44 on Sep 27, 2019 |
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2019 21:39
|
|