BASE M2 Mac Mini - amzn.to/3HnTttO Using Blackmagic to test the speed on the base model M2 Mac Mini 256GB Storage.
Пікірлер
Finally! thx for the video. Hope your channel grows as fast as you publish your videos!
@maiba02 Жыл бұрын
Thanks for the testing!!! We really appreciate it
@nick-dogg Жыл бұрын
Like the journalistic neutral tone of the title and voice over. No drama. The audio is sub par to draw me to pay closer attention. Short, sweet, and non polished. Back to basics. Well done. m2 pro Mac Mini 1TB and 32GB ram for me.
@hopeallwell7228 Жыл бұрын
Thank you for confirming what I had already suspected
@bzzerc Жыл бұрын
Thank you! ❤
@tibor123 Жыл бұрын
Could you post some other disk benchmarks, such as Amorphous DiskBench? I really wanna see the 4K random read write speeds etc.
@spacecadet2172 Жыл бұрын
Thanks!
@DestroyCode Жыл бұрын
Which monitor are you using during the test ?
@danieleppelsheimer9273 Жыл бұрын
I´ve just gotten the 512 GB M2 Mac Mini. Read and write speeds are at around 3.000 MB/s. As expected.
@henkar6920 Жыл бұрын
This is exactly what I wanted to confirm. I was looking to upgrade to the 512GB model. No way I'd do that if it was still restricted to half speed.
@jasonmiller3167 Жыл бұрын
Please make a video with Blackmagic Speed Test, in your Mini M2 8 512 , pls...
@marceloisme3 ай бұрын
Not bad!
@BenMilford Жыл бұрын
Regardless, this machine should can handle 4k video editing smoothly, isn't it? I really appreciate your video, thanks! 👍🏻
@bezeltipis Жыл бұрын
I still don’t think you will notice the speed on your day-to-day usage.
@quatrical Жыл бұрын
Unbelievable that the world's biggest company would cheap out on something that would severely impact not just performance but also longevity.
@bdhaliwal24 Жыл бұрын
No. It's not a surprise from Apple.
@llothar68 Жыл бұрын
Companies cheap out all the time. From the houses you buy to the cars you drive to the food you eat. They also do price anchoring, demand-shaping and other tricks I don't even know about. I wonder too how the longevity is affected. It may be that the NAND outlasts the capacitors and varistors in the power section. As for performance, one way to look at it is that a minimum performance spec is more than adequate for 95% of users. If no one told us the SSD was half as fast as it could be, most of us would never know. The way I see it is the first $200 upgrade should be the RAM. The next $200 is harder. Probably SSD.
@dannyize Жыл бұрын
Bullshit. Typical Sata 15 years ago was 80mb/s at 200 iops. Your 1500 mbs is _fantastic_. But I don’t care about mbps, it’s all about iops. And yes, for 99% it’s more than enough. You will pay for typical “ssd” in the cloud with 500 iops with some boosts. While at home this one will deliver 30-50x more. Those imbecile reviewers saying base m2 for casual usage have no clue. This pc beats 10k machine 5 years ago. Don’t say your Facebook KZhead browsing demands more now. As if it requires 10k 5yo machine for browsing
@Dede_Stepas Жыл бұрын
@@Dede_Stepas It still does not beat an AMD Threadripper or Epyc. Yes it beats a 10k Apple machine from 5 years ago. But that has to do with the MacPro prices. If you count GPU (for calculations not creator video encoding/decoding) it's still pretty bad compared to any PC. Even CPU is far less than my 12900k (which is at Mac Studio Ultra level). The GPU is why i think we will never see a MacPro with this design. It just don't scale well enough. Prove me wrong on March 14th
@llothar68 Жыл бұрын
@@llothar68 my comment was not about niche requirements and corner cases. Just about “slow” 256gb disks and basic m2 being “good enough for browsing and casual basic needs”. Even crappy celeron or intel “j” series are good enough for this. And last 20 years I was solving real life performance issues. It was never cpu. Always IO speeds and DB backends with lame queries 1st and sometimes lack of memory 2nd. All those GPU related ones are niche to say the least.
@Dede_Stepas Жыл бұрын
The base model m1 Mac mini I have is 2455 and write 3002 now it goes down some after I continue but Apple did not do the SSD nans and put it all on one chip instead of two 128GB.
@iTalktech1985 Жыл бұрын
can you do a stress test video ? For example opening as many tabs in safari as you want while watching 4 4K videos? Just to see how far does this base model go.
@rimo2866 Жыл бұрын
It won't go that far with 256 GB of storage but will beat out 100% of mini PCs. It will have the exact same power as the M2 Macbook Pro and will not have any more so you can compare it to that model if you don't find any other information cheers!
@joesalyers Жыл бұрын
@@joesalyers No you can't compare. For example disk speed is just 25% of a Macbook Pro. 1500 vs 6000
@llothar68 Жыл бұрын
@@llothar68 The M2 13 inch Macbook Pro is exactly the same as the M2 mac mini. The Same M2 with 8 CPU cores and 10 GPU cores and the same PCI 3.0 SSD speeds. Not the New 14 and 16 inch M2 Pro or M2 Max models which have better SOCs and faster PCI 4.0 SSDs speeds.
@joesalyers Жыл бұрын
@@joesalyers WTF are you talking about? Apples M1 or M2 do not use any kind of PCIe of any version but Apple Fabric for communicating with the NAND chips directly. We have enough videos that show that the base models can't improve speed by interlacing access to multiple NAND chips because they have only one. Thats the problem. Looks like Apple Silicion has a quad interlacing. So it would need at least one TB storage for highest 6000mb speed (4x256gb chips).
@llothar68 Жыл бұрын
@@llothar68 . You are repeating marketing garbage. Yes using 2x256gb chips will double the speed we all know that. Apple Fabric is a marketing term, it is actually PCB-PCI traces known as NVMe-oF not a physical slot. Apple holds NO patent for "Apple Fabric" its a marketing term for an open source standard. NVMExpress is the standard and Apple Fabric is a marketing term for NVMe-oF. Also if you looks at APFS and the underlying BSD tech of storage containers the lower M1/M2 chips have the same speed as a PCI gen3x4 drive and the larger M1 & 2 Pro/Max have PCI 4x4 speeds which when used with APFS will result in faster speeds due to a software container format similar to RAID. This is all done over NVMExpress controller. Apple Fabric is NVMe-oF but the controller is still NVMEexpress. How you get to the controller is irrelevant since it will be the same since it is all PCIe whether its a slot or traces on a PCB. Let me help you out this is. Directly from the NVME implementation manual. NVM Express (NVMe) is a specification defining how host software communicates with non-volatile memory across a PCI Express (PCIe) bus. It is the industry standard for PCIe solid state drives (SSDs) in all form factors (U.2, M.2, AIC, EDSFF). NVMExpress is the non-profit consortium managing and marketing NVMe technology. In addition to the NVMe base specification, the organization hosts other specifications: NVMe over Fabrics (NVMe-oF) for using NVMe commands over a networked fabric and NVMe Management Interface (NVMe-MI) to manage NVMe/PCIe SSDs in servers and storage systems. So now you know that Apple Fabric is just PCIe storage using NVMExpress right?
@joesalyers Жыл бұрын
I will keep my current M1 base Mac Mini. If you are going to go M2 mini you are best served upgrading to the faster 512gb storage. Just ashamed that will cost you more if you don’t want it simply for the speed.
@joewozniak2231 Жыл бұрын
auch, i canceled my cheapest M2 mini order. thanks a lot.
@lilslope1974 Жыл бұрын
Damn, my 2015 iMac with its 512GB SSD is still a bit faster reading at 1800 MB/s is still faster than the base M2. Write speeds are "only" 800-1000 MB/s. No wonder it's still kicking some butt 8 years later.
@epcalderhead Жыл бұрын
So does this mean, the speed will be much faster with 512 gb model?
@jackkim2522 Жыл бұрын
Yes around double the speed
@olliej4591 Жыл бұрын
I agree that the base model downgrade is lame, but I also find it funny that 1500MB/s is now considered “slow” after several decades of using computers with noisy drives 1/20th that speed. Us old nerds are eating good these days. 😂
@tronam Жыл бұрын
untill 4 years ago a m2. ssd branded Samsung 970 Evo granted 1500Mbps read and 500Mbps write, about 80€ for 250GB, this in theory, under windows it never reached that speed due to lots of bottleneck, at that price you should say thank if you have 200Mbps W/R
@daniele5976 Жыл бұрын
can't understand if this is a sarcastic video or not but 1500MB/s RW is a great result for 599$ lol
@daniele5976 Жыл бұрын
Why would you want to upgrade from M1 256bg to M2 256gb if hard drive would be bottleneck for CPU.
@michal5542 Жыл бұрын
What’s your monitor?
@shawnjaded1539 Жыл бұрын
Noting fancy, Sceptre 24" amzn.to/3IkzoGn I peeled the logo sticker off the monitor.
@brandon20904 Жыл бұрын
Apple is in a weird mess atm with their M1-M2-series. They must artificially limit features and gimp performance which is very evident as these devices are reviewed by normal end users.
@dremias Жыл бұрын
For 99% os that don’t use our machines for anymore than word processing and porn, it’s lightnin’
@chancesareshewears Жыл бұрын
Bruh... tabs... lol it's really fast
@brandon20904 Жыл бұрын
Really disappointing from Apple, compared to the M1 256gb speeds
@olliej4591 Жыл бұрын
Nobody cared until tech KZheadrs were looking for things to complain about. It doesn’t impact many users who are using the M2 Mac mini. Let’s be honest right now.
@RealJoseph123 Жыл бұрын
@@RealJoseph123 no of course. But for people who want to spec it up slightly to say 16gb memory for creative tasks/applications now have to deal with slower memory swap speeds… all to save Apple some pocket change. The 2 Nand chips on the M1 version shouldn’t have been downgraded to 1…
@olliej4591 Жыл бұрын
@@olliej4591 i mean they dropped the price. think most ppl would rather cheaper price
@takoflame4948 Жыл бұрын
It’s nice from Apple to make computers for poor people too though
@damir7097 Жыл бұрын
@@damir7097 of course it’s the budget/cheapest version. Just annoying that they’ve changed something to downgrade part of the performance from the previous generation
@olliej4591 Жыл бұрын
Yuk ...does the 512 one behave this way too ??
@elysiumcore Жыл бұрын
Nope the 512 gets about double the speed.
@brandon20904 Жыл бұрын
@@brandon20904are you sure?
@shameermulji Жыл бұрын
@@brandon20904 Double the speed is still half of the MacStudio speed. 6000 is the base line for me.
@llothar68 Жыл бұрын
@@shameermulji That's what others are confirming and on MacRumors as well.
@brandon20904 Жыл бұрын
@@brandon20904 thanks!
@shameermulji Жыл бұрын
Audio levels are too low!
@ianhailey Жыл бұрын
Mac Studio M1 base with 512Gb disk (Write at 6Gb/s | Read at 5Gb/s) LOL
@dwdos Жыл бұрын
The 512gb is slow too
@wearywillie3675 Жыл бұрын
Your audio sucks, buy a microphone for this! :) Great content anyway
@interproservice Жыл бұрын
yeah new bottleneck m2 .. don't buy minimum the 512 NAND Model
Finally! thx for the video. Hope your channel grows as fast as you publish your videos!
Thanks for the testing!!! We really appreciate it
Like the journalistic neutral tone of the title and voice over. No drama. The audio is sub par to draw me to pay closer attention. Short, sweet, and non polished. Back to basics. Well done. m2 pro Mac Mini 1TB and 32GB ram for me.
Thank you for confirming what I had already suspected
Thank you! ❤
Could you post some other disk benchmarks, such as Amorphous DiskBench? I really wanna see the 4K random read write speeds etc.
Thanks!
Which monitor are you using during the test ?
I´ve just gotten the 512 GB M2 Mac Mini. Read and write speeds are at around 3.000 MB/s. As expected.
This is exactly what I wanted to confirm. I was looking to upgrade to the 512GB model. No way I'd do that if it was still restricted to half speed.
Please make a video with Blackmagic Speed Test, in your Mini M2 8 512 , pls...
Not bad!
Regardless, this machine should can handle 4k video editing smoothly, isn't it? I really appreciate your video, thanks! 👍🏻
I still don’t think you will notice the speed on your day-to-day usage.
Unbelievable that the world's biggest company would cheap out on something that would severely impact not just performance but also longevity.
No. It's not a surprise from Apple.
Companies cheap out all the time. From the houses you buy to the cars you drive to the food you eat. They also do price anchoring, demand-shaping and other tricks I don't even know about. I wonder too how the longevity is affected. It may be that the NAND outlasts the capacitors and varistors in the power section. As for performance, one way to look at it is that a minimum performance spec is more than adequate for 95% of users. If no one told us the SSD was half as fast as it could be, most of us would never know. The way I see it is the first $200 upgrade should be the RAM. The next $200 is harder. Probably SSD.
Bullshit. Typical Sata 15 years ago was 80mb/s at 200 iops. Your 1500 mbs is _fantastic_. But I don’t care about mbps, it’s all about iops. And yes, for 99% it’s more than enough. You will pay for typical “ssd” in the cloud with 500 iops with some boosts. While at home this one will deliver 30-50x more. Those imbecile reviewers saying base m2 for casual usage have no clue. This pc beats 10k machine 5 years ago. Don’t say your Facebook KZhead browsing demands more now. As if it requires 10k 5yo machine for browsing
@@Dede_Stepas It still does not beat an AMD Threadripper or Epyc. Yes it beats a 10k Apple machine from 5 years ago. But that has to do with the MacPro prices. If you count GPU (for calculations not creator video encoding/decoding) it's still pretty bad compared to any PC. Even CPU is far less than my 12900k (which is at Mac Studio Ultra level). The GPU is why i think we will never see a MacPro with this design. It just don't scale well enough. Prove me wrong on March 14th
@@llothar68 my comment was not about niche requirements and corner cases. Just about “slow” 256gb disks and basic m2 being “good enough for browsing and casual basic needs”. Even crappy celeron or intel “j” series are good enough for this. And last 20 years I was solving real life performance issues. It was never cpu. Always IO speeds and DB backends with lame queries 1st and sometimes lack of memory 2nd. All those GPU related ones are niche to say the least.
The base model m1 Mac mini I have is 2455 and write 3002 now it goes down some after I continue but Apple did not do the SSD nans and put it all on one chip instead of two 128GB.
can you do a stress test video ? For example opening as many tabs in safari as you want while watching 4 4K videos? Just to see how far does this base model go.
It won't go that far with 256 GB of storage but will beat out 100% of mini PCs. It will have the exact same power as the M2 Macbook Pro and will not have any more so you can compare it to that model if you don't find any other information cheers!
@@joesalyers No you can't compare. For example disk speed is just 25% of a Macbook Pro. 1500 vs 6000
@@llothar68 The M2 13 inch Macbook Pro is exactly the same as the M2 mac mini. The Same M2 with 8 CPU cores and 10 GPU cores and the same PCI 3.0 SSD speeds. Not the New 14 and 16 inch M2 Pro or M2 Max models which have better SOCs and faster PCI 4.0 SSDs speeds.
@@joesalyers WTF are you talking about? Apples M1 or M2 do not use any kind of PCIe of any version but Apple Fabric for communicating with the NAND chips directly. We have enough videos that show that the base models can't improve speed by interlacing access to multiple NAND chips because they have only one. Thats the problem. Looks like Apple Silicion has a quad interlacing. So it would need at least one TB storage for highest 6000mb speed (4x256gb chips).
@@llothar68 . You are repeating marketing garbage. Yes using 2x256gb chips will double the speed we all know that. Apple Fabric is a marketing term, it is actually PCB-PCI traces known as NVMe-oF not a physical slot. Apple holds NO patent for "Apple Fabric" its a marketing term for an open source standard. NVMExpress is the standard and Apple Fabric is a marketing term for NVMe-oF. Also if you looks at APFS and the underlying BSD tech of storage containers the lower M1/M2 chips have the same speed as a PCI gen3x4 drive and the larger M1 & 2 Pro/Max have PCI 4x4 speeds which when used with APFS will result in faster speeds due to a software container format similar to RAID. This is all done over NVMExpress controller. Apple Fabric is NVMe-oF but the controller is still NVMEexpress. How you get to the controller is irrelevant since it will be the same since it is all PCIe whether its a slot or traces on a PCB. Let me help you out this is. Directly from the NVME implementation manual. NVM Express (NVMe) is a specification defining how host software communicates with non-volatile memory across a PCI Express (PCIe) bus. It is the industry standard for PCIe solid state drives (SSDs) in all form factors (U.2, M.2, AIC, EDSFF). NVMExpress is the non-profit consortium managing and marketing NVMe technology. In addition to the NVMe base specification, the organization hosts other specifications: NVMe over Fabrics (NVMe-oF) for using NVMe commands over a networked fabric and NVMe Management Interface (NVMe-MI) to manage NVMe/PCIe SSDs in servers and storage systems. So now you know that Apple Fabric is just PCIe storage using NVMExpress right?
I will keep my current M1 base Mac Mini. If you are going to go M2 mini you are best served upgrading to the faster 512gb storage. Just ashamed that will cost you more if you don’t want it simply for the speed.
auch, i canceled my cheapest M2 mini order. thanks a lot.
Damn, my 2015 iMac with its 512GB SSD is still a bit faster reading at 1800 MB/s is still faster than the base M2. Write speeds are "only" 800-1000 MB/s. No wonder it's still kicking some butt 8 years later.
So does this mean, the speed will be much faster with 512 gb model?
Yes around double the speed
I agree that the base model downgrade is lame, but I also find it funny that 1500MB/s is now considered “slow” after several decades of using computers with noisy drives 1/20th that speed. Us old nerds are eating good these days. 😂
untill 4 years ago a m2. ssd branded Samsung 970 Evo granted 1500Mbps read and 500Mbps write, about 80€ for 250GB, this in theory, under windows it never reached that speed due to lots of bottleneck, at that price you should say thank if you have 200Mbps W/R
can't understand if this is a sarcastic video or not but 1500MB/s RW is a great result for 599$ lol
Why would you want to upgrade from M1 256bg to M2 256gb if hard drive would be bottleneck for CPU.
What’s your monitor?
Noting fancy, Sceptre 24" amzn.to/3IkzoGn I peeled the logo sticker off the monitor.
Apple is in a weird mess atm with their M1-M2-series. They must artificially limit features and gimp performance which is very evident as these devices are reviewed by normal end users.
For 99% os that don’t use our machines for anymore than word processing and porn, it’s lightnin’
Bruh... tabs... lol it's really fast
Really disappointing from Apple, compared to the M1 256gb speeds
Nobody cared until tech KZheadrs were looking for things to complain about. It doesn’t impact many users who are using the M2 Mac mini. Let’s be honest right now.
@@RealJoseph123 no of course. But for people who want to spec it up slightly to say 16gb memory for creative tasks/applications now have to deal with slower memory swap speeds… all to save Apple some pocket change. The 2 Nand chips on the M1 version shouldn’t have been downgraded to 1…
@@olliej4591 i mean they dropped the price. think most ppl would rather cheaper price
It’s nice from Apple to make computers for poor people too though
@@damir7097 of course it’s the budget/cheapest version. Just annoying that they’ve changed something to downgrade part of the performance from the previous generation
Yuk ...does the 512 one behave this way too ??
Nope the 512 gets about double the speed.
@@brandon20904are you sure?
@@brandon20904 Double the speed is still half of the MacStudio speed. 6000 is the base line for me.
@@shameermulji That's what others are confirming and on MacRumors as well.
@@brandon20904 thanks!
Audio levels are too low!
Mac Studio M1 base with 512Gb disk (Write at 6Gb/s | Read at 5Gb/s) LOL
The 512gb is slow too
Your audio sucks, buy a microphone for this! :) Great content anyway
yeah new bottleneck m2 .. don't buy minimum the 512 NAND Model
🤮🤮🤮🤮🤮🤮🤮🤮🤮🤮🤮💩💩💩💩💩💩💩💩💩💩💩💩💩💩💩