3 ms·

Companies usually buy base models. Apple is also struggling with supply chain, as M1 is still prominent. Another feature of this issue is that because of their

Companies usually buy base models. Apple is also struggling with supply chain, as M1 is still prominent. Another feature of this issue is that because of their parsimonious storage configuration and linkage of M2 chip and storage, upgrades are nuts - it costs as much as an iPhone to get a storage upgrade that is like $100 with commodity SSD storage.

ChuckNorris89 4y ago
>Apple is also struggling with supply chain Not anymore. They actually had to cut back M2 orders due to slow sales. Nvidia and AMD and others have also been cutting back orders for the same reason. The consumer tech supply chain is no longer blocked like ti was during the pandemic.
senttoschool 4y ago
>upgrades are nuts - it costs as much as an iPhone to get a storage upgrade that is like $100 with commodity SSD storage. I generally agree that Apple's SSD and RAM upgrades are too expensive. I'd like them to be cheaper. However, I'd like to point out that Apple's SSDs have built-in protection against data-loss from power loss which is usually an enterprise SSD feature. Also, Apple uses LPDDR5 on their Macs which are quite a bit more expensive than DDR4/DDR5. In addition, there's some evidence that Apple's LPDDR5 is actually not off the shelf and is specialized specifically for Apple.[0] That said, yea I think Apple is a bit stingy with SSD and RAM upgrades. [0]https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/24gb-macbook-air-m2-ram-question.2355885/ https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/24gb-macbook-air-m2-ram...
- labcomputer 4y ago
  I know I would, and I dare say most people are the same, prefer to have the option for 3% lower memory bandwidth in exchange for 4x more memory. There’s no justification for Apple’s memory prices.
  - tough 4y ago
    I see it like cars, mass produced standard models are way cheaper than the ones with all the extras and whistles and what not
  - wtallis 4y ago
    Where do you get that "3% lower memory bandwidth" figure from? LPDDR5 is running at 6400 MT/s on at least Apple and Intel platforms, and the fastest DDR5 SODIMMs I've seen so far are 5600MT/s: 12.5% slower, assuming equal bus width (only true for the base M1/2 processors).
    - labcomputer 4y ago
      3%, 12% Potato, potato. It’s a small spec performance difference for a huge price difference. Meanwhile, for actual real-world workloads, not spilling to swap (because you have enough memory) will result in real-world performance that is many times (even an order of magnitude) better. Even with Apples blazing fast SSDs. Oh, and you can also spec a cheaper SSD because you don’t need one that can take a bajillion writes (because you aren’t treating your SSD as memory). AND the cheaper SSD will last longer too. In short, Apple could spec cheaper components AND get better real world performance by simply shipping computers that have enough memory. Edit: also 3% comes from shipping the absolute fasted DDR5 modules vs the second fasted DDR5.
      - sliken 4y ago
        Sure, that's 3%, but what about shipping 2x, 4x, and 8x as wide memory systems, largely enabled by not using industry standard dimms.
  - sliken 4y ago
    3%? M2 = 100GB/sec M2 pro = 200GB/sec M2 max = 400GB/sec M1 Extreme = 800GB/sec. Most x86-64 laptops and desktops are in the 60-80GB/sec range. Some desktop or server only chip (threadripper, epyc, Xeons, a few intel workstation chips) have 150 or 300GB/sec. 400GB/sec vs 80GB/sec is quite a bit more than 3%, and is available in the mbp 14" or mbp 16".
- jlokier 4y ago
  > Apple's SSDs have built-in protection against data-loss from power loss which is usually an enterprise SSD feature. It's a bit arguable. On Macos the well-known operation 'fsync' which exists for the sole purpose of committing files to durable storage doesn't protect files against data loss if there's power loss. You can ask for data to be committed more durably through a Macos-specific API, in which case those Apple SSDs are a lot slower than other good SSDs at doing this. As most software uses 'fsync' to durably commit files, that stored data is not protected against power loss for some time. VMs either use the equivalent operation to implement filesystem barriers, or the very slow but more durable Macos-specific operation. Either way, these are not great SSDs for protection against data loss on power failure. As measured by Asahi Linux folks: "Apple's custom NVMes are amazingly fast – if you don't care about data integrity" (https://twitter.com/marcan42/status/1494213855387734019 https://twitter.com/marcan42/status/1494213855387734019 / https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/ssd-flash-storage-in-macs-premium-prices-for-garbage.2335073/ https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/ssd-flash-storage-in-ma... / https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30370551 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30370551) "Well, this is unfortunate. It turns out Apple's custom NVMe drives are amazingly fast - if you don't care about data integrity. If you do, they drop down to HDD performance. Thread." "For a while, we've noticed that random write performance with fsync (data integrity) on Asahi Linux (and also on Linux on T2 Macs) was terrible. As in 46 IOPS terrible. That's slower than many modern HDDs. We thought we were missing something, since this didn't happen on macOS." [Except it does happen on Macos when the equivalant API is used.]
reaperducer 4y ago
$100 with commodity SSD storage. You answered your own question there. Apple doesn't used "commodity" SSD storage. Apple's SSDs are enterprise-grade, not bottom-of-the-barrel commodity parts.
- blibble 4y ago
  probably don't need SLC with 300% redundancy in my laptop
- labcomputer 4y ago
  Apple SSDs perform no better than commodity SSDs that cost 20% as much. And Apple is just buying flash chips from someone else. There’s no “apple silicon” equivalent for SSDs.
  - sliken 4y ago
    Sort of, a traditional SSD is a combination of flash storage and a flash controller. Apple puts the flash controller inside their apple silicon.
- kennend3 4y ago
  "You answered your own question there. Apple doesn't used "commodity" SSD storage." what a weaird thing to say... So.. tell us.. where does apple get its SSD's if it is not "commodity"? Do they have their own SSD factory? Then you write "Apple's SSDs are enterprise-grade"... So like "commodity" right? Meaning others can buy "enterprise grade" SSD's and upgrade their non-apple laptops wtih them if they wanted to?
- Spooky23 4y ago
  I just bought a higher end M2 SSD part for my kids gaming rig for less than what apple is charging for an upgrade.

ChuckNorris89 4y ago

>Apple is also struggling with supply chain Not anymore. They actually had to cut back M2 orders due to slow sales. Nvidia and AMD and others have also been cutting back orders for the same reason. The consumer tech supply chain is no longer blocked like ti was during the pandemic.

senttoschool 4y ago

>upgrades are nuts - it costs as much as an iPhone to get a storage upgrade that is like $100 with commodity SSD storage. I generally agree that Apple's SSD and RAM upgrades are too expensive. I'd like them to be cheaper. However, I'd like to point out that Apple's SSDs have built-in protection against data-loss from power loss which is usually an enterprise SSD feature. Also, Apple uses LPDDR5 on their Macs which are quite a bit more expensive than DDR4/DDR5. In addition, there's some evidence that Apple's LPDDR5 is actually not off the shelf and is specialized specifically for Apple.[0] That said, yea I think Apple is a bit stingy with SSD and RAM upgrades. [0]https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/24gb-macbook-air-m2-ram-question.2355885/ https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/24gb-macbook-air-m2-ram...

labcomputer 4y ago
I know I would, and I dare say most people are the same, prefer to have the option for 3% lower memory bandwidth in exchange for 4x more memory. There’s no justification for Apple’s memory prices.
- tough 4y ago
  I see it like cars, mass produced standard models are way cheaper than the ones with all the extras and whistles and what not
- wtallis 4y ago
  Where do you get that "3% lower memory bandwidth" figure from? LPDDR5 is running at 6400 MT/s on at least Apple and Intel platforms, and the fastest DDR5 SODIMMs I've seen so far are 5600MT/s: 12.5% slower, assuming equal bus width (only true for the base M1/2 processors).
  - labcomputer 4y ago
    3%, 12% Potato, potato. It’s a small spec performance difference for a huge price difference. Meanwhile, for actual real-world workloads, not spilling to swap (because you have enough memory) will result in real-world performance that is many times (even an order of magnitude) better. Even with Apples blazing fast SSDs. Oh, and you can also spec a cheaper SSD because you don’t need one that can take a bajillion writes (because you aren’t treating your SSD as memory). AND the cheaper SSD will last longer too. In short, Apple could spec cheaper components AND get better real world performance by simply shipping computers that have enough memory. Edit: also 3% comes from shipping the absolute fasted DDR5 modules vs the second fasted DDR5.
    - sliken 4y ago
      Sure, that's 3%, but what about shipping 2x, 4x, and 8x as wide memory systems, largely enabled by not using industry standard dimms.
- sliken 4y ago
  3%? M2 = 100GB/sec M2 pro = 200GB/sec M2 max = 400GB/sec M1 Extreme = 800GB/sec. Most x86-64 laptops and desktops are in the 60-80GB/sec range. Some desktop or server only chip (threadripper, epyc, Xeons, a few intel workstation chips) have 150 or 300GB/sec. 400GB/sec vs 80GB/sec is quite a bit more than 3%, and is available in the mbp 14" or mbp 16".
jlokier 4y ago
> Apple's SSDs have built-in protection against data-loss from power loss which is usually an enterprise SSD feature. It's a bit arguable. On Macos the well-known operation 'fsync' which exists for the sole purpose of committing files to durable storage doesn't protect files against data loss if there's power loss. You can ask for data to be committed more durably through a Macos-specific API, in which case those Apple SSDs are a lot slower than other good SSDs at doing this. As most software uses 'fsync' to durably commit files, that stored data is not protected against power loss for some time. VMs either use the equivalent operation to implement filesystem barriers, or the very slow but more durable Macos-specific operation. Either way, these are not great SSDs for protection against data loss on power failure. As measured by Asahi Linux folks: "Apple's custom NVMes are amazingly fast – if you don't care about data integrity" (https://twitter.com/marcan42/status/1494213855387734019 https://twitter.com/marcan42/status/1494213855387734019 / https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/ssd-flash-storage-in-macs-premium-prices-for-garbage.2335073/ https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/ssd-flash-storage-in-ma... / https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30370551 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30370551) "Well, this is unfortunate. It turns out Apple's custom NVMe drives are amazingly fast - if you don't care about data integrity. If you do, they drop down to HDD performance. Thread." "For a while, we've noticed that random write performance with fsync (data integrity) on Asahi Linux (and also on Linux on T2 Macs) was terrible. As in 46 IOPS terrible. That's slower than many modern HDDs. We thought we were missing something, since this didn't happen on macOS." [Except it does happen on Macos when the equivalant API is used.]

reaperducer 4y ago

$100 with commodity SSD storage. You answered your own question there. Apple doesn't used "commodity" SSD storage. Apple's SSDs are enterprise-grade, not bottom-of-the-barrel commodity parts.

blibble 4y ago
probably don't need SLC with 300% redundancy in my laptop
labcomputer 4y ago
Apple SSDs perform no better than commodity SSDs that cost 20% as much. And Apple is just buying flash chips from someone else. There’s no “apple silicon” equivalent for SSDs.
- sliken 4y ago
  Sort of, a traditional SSD is a combination of flash storage and a flash controller. Apple puts the flash controller inside their apple silicon.
kennend3 4y ago
"You answered your own question there. Apple doesn't used "commodity" SSD storage." what a weaird thing to say... So.. tell us.. where does apple get its SSD's if it is not "commodity"? Do they have their own SSD factory? Then you write "Apple's SSDs are enterprise-grade"... So like "commodity" right? Meaning others can buy "enterprise grade" SSD's and upgrade their non-apple laptops wtih them if they wanted to?
Spooky23 4y ago
I just bought a higher end M2 SSD part for my kids gaming rig for less than what apple is charging for an upgrade.