The GetDPI Photography Forum

Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!

Apple M1, a revolution in the making?

k-hawinkler

Well-known member
Well according to
it looks like letting the M1 computer sleep worsens the problem Significantly.
I really appreciate the fact that a number of folks have started to verifiably demonstrate what sort of thing produces unnecessary writes to SSD.
 

Jorgen Udvang

Subscriber Member
The more I read, the more confused I get. While it's obvious that operations like high resolution video editing with extensive corrections will cause these kind of problems, other activities that haven't typically been very demanding in the past, now generate lots of processing and storage activity on computers. Some is probably simply due to "lazy programming" without optimisation for "computer wear", and some due to background activities that often aren't even useful to the end user. Think websites with tons of videos and animations going on while one reads a simple newspaper article.

One obvious contribution towards a solution (I don't think there is a single solution to all this, but rather that a treshold has been reached that requires Apple to look at the whole complex) would be increased RAM. However, Apple pricing policy makes that an expensive alternative for users. I wouldn't be surprised if Apple will feel forced to lower RAM prices to make that part of the solution more edible for the average user, and maybe remove the 8GB alternative entirely. They have done similar things in the past when it comes to pricing, and the cost for Apple would be moderate, since RAM in these quantities isn't particularly expensive to manufacture and install.

Unfortunately, demand for increased computer processing power never seems to stop. Wether it's children playing Roblox, ordinary users watching sports, or professionals editing high resolution video, the developers behind see to that we need more at every corner. If somebody had told me a year ago that I would be looking at 8K video for the content I edit, I would have just laughed it off. Now, I see the potential for producing more interesting, and not least more competitive, content by using 8K as the basis for the 1080 or 4K video that I output.

So the tech has to work, today, tomorrow and next year. If users start doubting the longevity of Apple's products, manyy may go somewhere else. Apple knows that of course.
 

Godfrey

Well-known member
Few users, other than the geeky crowd like we have in this thread and who complain about every little thing on the computer techie forums, ever ruminate on these things. Most just buy a computer and use it until it dies, or until a newer one strikes their fancy and they buy that one.

I've had only Apple computers since 1984. I've used them all a lot, for all kinds of things from light work to heavy duty video processing. And I tend to keep my computer for about 8 years each. I have not yet had a single Apple computer/phone/tablet that wasn't 100% fully functional to hand off to the next user, as gift or as sale, when I moved on to the next one. I don't see that changing at all with the M1 chipset... :)

G
 

Jorgen Udvang

Subscriber Member
It's interesting to go back to some of the reviews that were made just after the launch of the M1 computers. In the review linked to below, Max Yuryev compares two MacBook Pro with M1, one with 8 and one with 16GB of RAM. He is amazed to see that the 8GB version for most applications is almost as fast as the 16GB model. He does however point out that while the 16GB model rarely maxes out the RAM, the one with 8GB does that all the time.


In retrospect, it is clear that the 8GB MacBook has to find the needed space somewhere, and "somewhere" is obviously on the SSD, which will then experience much more read/write activity (paging/swapping) than the model with more RAM. How much this will influence the life cycle of the cheaper model, if at all, nobody knows yet, and that probably includes Apple. However, should I decide to buy an M1, it will certainly be one with 16GB RAM, even if I will see little difference in performance for most of the work I currently do.
 

k-hawinkler

Well-known member
Well, at my current TBW use rate my M1 Mac mini internal 2TB SSD should last for ... wait ... drum roll ... 212 years, assuming it uses 3,000 write cycles Toshiba memory chips. So if Apple uses indeed only 300 write cycles components that's still 21.2 years. :cool:
 

Jorgen Udvang

Subscriber Member
Well, at my current TBW use rate my M1 Mac mini internal 2TB SSD should last for ... wait ... drum roll ... 212 years, assuming it uses 3,000 write cycles Toshiba memory chips. So if Apple uses indeed only 300 write cycles components that's still 21.2 years. :cool:
Clearly you are right. But if the same number of read/writes are done on an M1 with a 256GB SSD, the wear per "cell" would potentially be 8 times as high. Combine that with 8GB of RAM instead of 16, and it increases by an unknown exponent.

If we go back to the "old days", like about a year ago, computers that were confronted with more work than they were designed for would become slow, then overheat and slow down more, which would make the user give up the project or get a faster computer. Not so with the M1. Users won't experience any limitations, since the computer will just use the SSD when there's not enough RAM, and the speed will make the operation transparent to the user.

Again, we don't know if or when this will develop into a problem. Hopefully it won't.
 

k-hawinkler

Well-known member
Clearly you are right. But if the same number of read/writes are done on an M1 with a 256GB SSD, the wear per "cell" would potentially be 8 times as high. Combine that with 8GB of RAM instead of 16, and it increases by an unknown exponent.

If we go back to the "old days", like about a year ago, computers that were confronted with more work than they were designed for would become slow, then overheat and slow down more, which would make the user give up the project or get a faster computer. Not so with the M1. Users won't experience any limitations, since the computer will just use the SSD when there's not enough RAM, and the speed will make the operation transparent to the user.

Again, we don't know if or when this will develop into a problem. Hopefully it won't.
Thanks Jorgen. I don’t mean to belittle the issue.

Some use cases seem to have created tremendous problems, especially for the low end of memory and SSD capacity configurations, such as 8GB/256GB or even 8GB/512GB M1s. In these situations additionally letting the computers go to sleep seems to have exacerbated the problem. I am also not convinced that in this regard Apple’s macOS Big Sur is free of programming bugs. I hope that Apple addresses the issue and deals with it. I certainly would expect if such an M1 computer dies within the warranty period Apple replaces it free of charge or reimburses the cost. I think the real problem is with those M1 computers that die soon after the warranty or Apple Care + period Is over.

Based on my long experience with computers of any kind and my use cases as well as available funds to me, I never would buy a minimal computer configuration but try to maximize memory and data storage, especially if they can’t be upgraded later. This has served me well and allowed me to enjoy their use beyond their designed in or expected life time. Typically commercial or high end computers become operationally uneconomical or obsolete after 3 to 5 years as long as Moore’s law is still in effect that predicts doubling of transistor count in chips every 18 months.

So I still enjoy using my late 2013 “trashcan” Mac Pro 64GB/1TB (maximal 1TB SSD was offered at the time) that has 8 CPU cores, 4 USB-A, and 6 TB2 ports. It’s still going strong once I cleaned out all dust and crude from the ventilation to prevent overheating. I decided to get a maxed out M1 Mac mini for several reasons, namely:

* the Mac Pro could die at anytime and leave me without access to my 15 year old obsolete Firmtek RAID enclosures that hold all my images and backups.
* I wanted faster TB3 data transfers than what the TB2 of my older Mac Pro could deliver.
* Having been aware of ARM pretty much since it beginning, I wanted to experience an M1 Apple Silicon computer in actual daily use.

So far my M1 Mac mini has worked out particularly well for me. It’s very responsive, including data access to new OWC TB3 RAID enclosures that support 6G SATA drives like the new 18TB Seagate IronWolfe NAS hard drives. My old enclosures could handle only 1.5G and 3G. I also can use fast TB3 SSDs that nearly match the speed of the internal Apple SSD and most importantly can function as boot drives of the M1 computer. Have been there, done it reliably, and got the T-shirt. BTW that could be particularly important for minimal configuration M1 users that try to avoid wearing out the internal Apple SSD and instead would wear out an external cheaper replaceable TB3 SSD. :cool: Furthermore the M1 with its Rosetta2 emulation gives me all the functionality I need, including non-native Capture One Pro and the old Nik app.

Of course, the fairly new design of the M1 also has its quirks. So far I have experienced the following non-deal breakers, namely:

* I have to shut down the M1 twice in a row, without logging in the second time it boots up.
* in order to be able to wake up my external LG monitor it has to be connected through both an TB3 and HDMI cable. So if the currently in effect connection doesn’t wake up the monitor, I can use its built in hardware controls to switch to the other cable. That’s the trick that so far has always worked.
* The M1 occasionally crashes, shuts down, and automatically restarts when YouTube videos have run in Safari for several hours. I didn’t observe this feature before. It seems to have been introduced with Big Sur 11.2 or 11.2.2.

Obviously there are some bugs, I believe, in macOS Big Sur that Apple needs to fix and hopefully pretty soon, including the TBW issue briefly discussed above. Maybe the sleep issue I experienced is related to the other.

Overall, the M1 has greatly enhanced my computer setup, is very enjoyable and productive to use, and should work for many years to come. Of course, I also have the option in the future to add a more powerful Apple Silicon computer when available. But I am set for now and in no hurry to make any changes aside from OS and apps updates or upgrades. :)
 
Last edited:

k-hawinkler

Well-known member

Hubs:





Dock:



Interestingly OWC has a Dock Ejector app:
It ejects all drives connected to their own Hubs and Docks, but only those.
It doesn’t eject drives connected for example to the CalDigit Hub.

I use that feature to eject RAIDs but to keep SSDs mounted by using an appropriate Dock or Hub.
 
Last edited:

Jorgen Udvang

Subscriber Member
Thanks, that was informative, not least the "need to know" article. This is getting increasingly complicated, and the docks are soon larger than the computers they are connected to. I think it's just a question of time before these units need a cooling fan. The hub I use for my MB 12 gets so hot that I can use it to roast steaks with.
 

k-hawinkler

Well-known member
Thanks Jorgen.
Well, the power supply, or whatever it is transformer/converter, for the Hubs and Docks is in the middle of the power cable and noticeably warm.
The M1 Mac mini, Hubs and Docks stay pretty cool, not even really warm to the touch.
 

k-hawinkler

Well-known member
.
 

Jorgen Udvang

Subscriber Member
I'm tempted to buy the cheapest 256/8 (or 256/16) Mini and see how it would run from an external SSD. I'm very curious about OWC's U2 Shuttle:


If I could boot the computer from a fast SSD with the shuttle mounted in a Thunderbolt 3 enclosure, flexibility would be more or less endless.
 

Jorgen Udvang

Subscriber Member
Very interesting reading. Although the system will use some data on the on the computer (iSC and 1TR), I asume that most system functions will run on the external SSD.

There's a new OWC unit coming soon that is probably perfect for this purpose in combination with the U2 shuttle:

 

k-hawinkler

Well-known member
Thanks Jorgen. AFAIK in order to achieve the quoted read/write performance you have to fill up the enclosure with SSDs and stripe across them in RAID 0.
 

Jorgen Udvang

Subscriber Member
Here's another relevant article:


"With an internal SSD now achieving 2.8 GB/s through a T2 controller (for current Intel Macs) or the M1 chip, its performance should be similar to that of PC-2700 DDR SDRAM, last fitted to iMacs in 2003-04."

2.8 GB/s would also be the theoretical maximum speed through a Thunderbolt 3 connection to the OWC unit, although I doubt the real life speed would be as high. However, RAM speed was hardly ever the bottleneck of an 2003 iMac, at least not for those who had enough of it, which few did back then. The HDD was the bottleneck, and even if there had been SSDs around, the communication with the SSD would have made that a bottleneck too.

There are a few videos online made by people who edit 4K video on external SSDs. What most or all of them claim is that, even with USB 3.1, the communication with the external SSD is fast enough to make the editing experience seem seamless. RAM "overflow" with the resulting page/swap exercises obviously demands much faster data rates, but compared to the actual RAM speeds that were common just a few years ago, even 2.0 GB/s would probably feel sufficintly fast, at least in combination with 16 GB RAM.

It will be very interesting to see how this works out in real life, and I will start setting aside funds to buy the necessary equipment as soon as possible. If I buy the Mercury Pro U.2 Dual, I will probably use one bay for system and application software (Photoshop, DaVinci Resolve). 1 TB should be enough. The other bay will be used for video footage and related data (sound, stills etc.) during editing.

And if it doesn't work as I hope, the unit can be moved to a bigger, more powerful Mac in the future.
 
Last edited:

k-hawinkler

Well-known member
Read/Write speed comparison of the internal SSD of
1TB late 2013 Mac Pro: READ ~830 MB/s, WRITE ~830-980 MB/s
2TB 2020 M1 Mac mini
: READ ~2900 MB/s, WRITE ~2720-3020 MB/s
as recorded by Blackmagic Disk Speed Test.

Well, quite an improvement and noticeable in daily use! I like it! :cool:
 
Top