Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...

M1 Mac owners are experiencing extremely high SSD writes over short periods of time, likely thanks to aggressive swap

FOR NEWS SITES AND OUTLETS: DON'T MAKE聽THIS SEEM EXTREME, THE CAUSE IS UNCONFIRMED AND THIS IS NOT A PROBLEM FOR MOST USERS WHO DONT HAMMER THEIR MACHINES聽

Some professional users of the new M1 Macbooks are experiencing extremely high drive writes over relatively short time.

IMPORTANT UPDATE:

This is likely macOS-related behaviour聽and Apple can fix it.聽

Update 13:24

Update 2:

Update no. infinity:

Don't buy Apple M1 computers with 8GB of RAM

Link to post
Share on other sites

hehe聽 mAcKbO0kS sUcK

Hi

Spoiler
Spoiler
Spoiler
Spoiler
Spoiler
Spoiler
Spoiler
Spoiler
Spoiler
Spoiler
Spoiler
Spoiler
Spoiler
Spoiler
Spoiler
Spoiler
Spoiler
Spoiler
Spoiler
Spoiler
Spoiler
Spoiler
Spoiler
Spoiler
Spoiler
Spoiler
Spoiler

hi

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, is not it brilliant?

Solder the ssd so that it cannot be replaced and machine is dead once its dead, limit warranty coverage based on TBW, make OS write whole bunch of stuff so that TBW limit is exhausted fast and the ssd is no longer covered by warranty. Sounds like fraud, does not it?

Honestly though - soldered storage is and always was terrible idea, and that's the reason i am personally staying away from many apple stuff nowadays, while i used to like it some time ago...

Link to post
Share on other sites

Man, that sucks. Especially if you've bought a smaller drive size and using an external one for example. Can you not just adjust the page file size like on Windows?

That's an F in the profile pic

Link to post
Share on other sites

My M1 Mini that I have had since around 20 November 2020 (ordered it right after apple event).

Given I have 16 GB RAM so my computer doesn't page much. 聽

1,5 TB Written, screenshot taken right now.

But these what these tools report are questionable, the biggest one is:聽Since I'm working from home I'm working on the computer almost every day and these tools only report 95 hours power on, SINCE THE END OF NOVEMBER!

And even if I would have a higher data write count to me this is a nothing burger.聽

1486465862_Skrmavbild2021-02-17kl_10_27_21.png.3bfe84ca65db97b951830eaf0344fd7e.png

Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Spindel said:

My M1 Mini that I have had since around 20 November 2020 (ordered it right after apple event).

Given I have 16 GB RAM so my computer doesn't page much. 聽

1,5 TB Written, screenshot taken right now.

But these what these tools report are questionable, the biggest one is:聽Since I'm working from home I'm working on the computer almost every day and these tools only report 95 hours power on, SINCE THE END OF NOVEMBER!

And even if I would have a higher data write count to me this is a nothing burger.聽

1486465862_Skrmavbild2021-02-17kl_10_27_21.png.3bfe84ca65db97b951830eaf0344fd7e.png

what app is that?

Don't buy Apple M1 computers with 8GB of RAM

Link to post
Share on other sites

Nevermind, turns out me no math good.

Main Rig:-

Ryzen 7 3800X | Asus ROG Strix X570-F Gaming | 16GB Team Group Dark Pro 3600Mhz | Corsair MP600 1TB PCIe Gen 4 | Sapphire 5700 XT Pulse | Corsair H115i Platinum | WD Black 1TB | WD Green 4TB | EVGA SuperNOVA G3 650W | Asus TUF GT501 | Samsung C27HG70 1440p 144hz HDR FreeSync 2 | Ubuntu 20.04.2 LTS |

Server:-

Intel NUC running Server 2019 + Synology DSM218+ with 2 x 4TB Toshiba NAS Ready HDDs (RAID0)

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Master Disaster said:

How the holy hell can the system be writing over 2TB per minute?

You forgot to divide by 432, 191 and 256 respectively...

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Archer42 said:

You forgot to divide by 432, 191 and 256 respectively...

Did I? I'll be honest and say maths was never my strongest subject in school 馃槃

Would you mind correcting me?

Main Rig:-

Ryzen 7 3800X | Asus ROG Strix X570-F Gaming | 16GB Team Group Dark Pro 3600Mhz | Corsair MP600 1TB PCIe Gen 4 | Sapphire 5700 XT Pulse | Corsair H115i Platinum | WD Black 1TB | WD Green 4TB | EVGA SuperNOVA G3 650W | Asus TUF GT501 | Samsung C27HG70 1440p 144hz HDR FreeSync 2 | Ubuntu 20.04.2 LTS |

Server:-

Intel NUC running Server 2019 + Synology DSM218+ with 2 x 4TB Toshiba NAS Ready HDDs (RAID0)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well to be honest I don't know what the fuss is, math below for why. A typical and conservative DWPD value for consumer SSD would be 0.2 and the Apple M1 devices have been around for what roughly 90 days?

(0.2 * 512GB) * 90 =聽9216GB

(0.2 * 256GB) * 90 = 4608GB

So anyone with less than 4TB of data written is completely fine, your SSD is not wearing out abnormally, even if we use 0.1 DWPD anyone under 2TB is fine. And these DWPD/TBW warranty figures are actually well below what the SSD NAND is capable of.

I don't know what they are reading but I highly doubt anyone has used 13% of their expected SSD life.

Also FYI most SSDs in the consumer market are closer to 0.4 DWPD so.....

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Master Disaster said:

Did I? I'll be honest and say maths was never my strongest subject in school 馃槃

Would you mind correcting me?

150TB聽in 432 hours is 5.79GB聽per minute.

15.7TB in 191 hours is 1.37GB聽a minute.

58TB in 256 hours is 3.78GB a Minute.

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Master Disaster said:

Lets do some maths...

150TB written in 432 Hours.

150 / 60 gives us writes per minute in TB.

150 / 60 = 2.5TBpM

Case 2

15.6TB in 191 Hours.

15.6 / 60 = 0.26TBpM or 260GBpM.

Case 3

58TB in 256 Hours.

58 / 60 = 960GBpM.

How the holy hell can the system be writing over 2TB per minute? Honestly I'm thinking this is a sensor issue, if the system was continuously writing 2TB per minute to the SSD there would be no bandwidth left for anything else, just opening an app would take minutes (if not hours).

I would say : (150 / 432) / 60 = 0.0058 TBpM

When you write 150 / 60, it means 150 TB writes in one hour 馃槃

PC #1 : Gigabyte Z170XP-SLI | i7-7700 | Cryorig C7 Cu | 16GB DDR4-2400 | LSI SAS 9211-8i | 240GB NVMe M.2 PCIe PNY CS2030 | SSD&HDDs 49.5TB total | Quantum LTO5 HH SAS drive |聽GC-Alpine Ridge | Corsair HX750i | Cooler Master Stacker STC-T01 | ASUS TUF Gaming VG27AQ 2560x1440 @ 60 Hz (plugged HDMI port, shared with PC #2) | Win10
PC #2 : Gigabyte MW70-3S0 | 2x E5-2667 v3 | 2x Intel BXSTS200C | 32GB DDR4-2133 ECC Reg | MSI RTX 3080 Ti Suprim X | 2x 1TB SSD SATA Samsung 870 EVO | Seasonic SSR-850TR | Lian Li PC-A77 | ASUS TUF Gaming VG27AQ 2560x1440 @ 144 Hz (plugged DP port, shared with PC #1) | Win10
PC #3 : Mini PC Zotac 4K | Celeron N3150 | 8GB DDR3L 1600 | 250GB M.2 SATA WD Blue | Sound Blaster X-Fi Surround 5.1 Pro USB | Samsung Blu-ray writer USB |聽Genius SP-HF1800A | TV Panasonic TX-40DX600E UltraHD | Win10
PC #4 : ASUS P2B-F | PIII 500MHz | 512MB SDR 100 | Leadtek WinFast GeForce 256 SDR 32MB | 2x Guillemot Maxi Gamer 3D虏 8MB in SLI | Creative Sound Blaster AWE64 ISA | 80GB HDD UATA | Fortron/Source FSP235-60GI | Zalman R1 | DELL E151FP 15" TFT 1024x768 | Win98SE

Laptop : Lenovo ThinkPad T61p | T9500 | 4GB DDR2 667 | Quadro FX 570m | 120GB SSD OCZ Vertex 2 | 15.4" TFT 1920x1200 | Win10

PC tablet : Fujitsu Point 1600 | PMMX 166MHz | 160MB EDO | 20GB HDD UATA | external floppy drive | 10.4" DSTN 800x600 touchscreen | AGFA SnapScan 1212u blue | Win98SE

Laptop collection #1 : IBM ThinkPad 340CSE | 486SLC2 66MHz | 12MB RAM | 360MB IDE | internal floppy drive | 10.4" DSTN 640x480 256 color | Win3.1 with MS-DOS 6.22

Laptop collection #2 : IBM ThinkPad 380E | PMMX 150MHz | 80MB EDO | NeoMagic MagicGraph128XD | 2.1GB IDE | internal floppy drive | internal CD-ROM drive | Intel PRO/100 Mobile PCMCIA | 12.1" FRSTN 800x600 16-bit color | Win98

Laptop collection #3 : Toshiba T2130CS | 486DX4 75MHz | 32MB EDO | 520MB IDE | internal floppy drive | 10.4" STN 640x480 256 color | Win3.1 with MS-DOS 6.22

And 6 others computers (Intel Compute Stick x5-Z8330, Giada Slim N10 WinXP,聽2 Apple classic and 2 PC pocket WinCE)

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Master Disaster said:

Would you mind correcting me?

6 minutes ago, Master Disaster said:

150TB written in 432 Hours.

150 / 60 gives us writes per minute in TB.

150 / 60 = 2.5TBpM

Well, i'll take this as example.

It will be 150/432 ~ 0.35TB/h, or ~358GB/h

Then 358/60 ~ 6GB/m

Then 6/60 = 0.1Gb/s, or ~102MB/s.

Still a lot, but much less crazy...

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, CarlBar said:

150TB聽in 432 hours is 5.79MB聽per minute.

15.7TB in 191 hours is 1.37 MB聽a minute.

58TB in 256 hours is 3.78MB a Minute.

That makes much more sense, I thought was maths must have been off, 2TB per minute is impossible.

Main Rig:-

Ryzen 7 3800X | Asus ROG Strix X570-F Gaming | 16GB Team Group Dark Pro 3600Mhz | Corsair MP600 1TB PCIe Gen 4 | Sapphire 5700 XT Pulse | Corsair H115i Platinum | WD Black 1TB | WD Green 4TB | EVGA SuperNOVA G3 650W | Asus TUF GT501 | Samsung C27HG70 1440p 144hz HDR FreeSync 2 | Ubuntu 20.04.2 LTS |

Server:-

Intel NUC running Server 2019 + Synology DSM218+ with 2 x 4TB Toshiba NAS Ready HDDs (RAID0)

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Master Disaster said:

Nevermind, turns out me no math good.

To聽be honest, for one of your other points now gone, SMART data is known to be unreliable and even more so with SSD. A lot of SSD firmware don't count data written in an actually standard logical way so if you read it with a generic SMART reader it's going to be wrong. I only read drive wear using the vendor provided tools, at least that is slightly trustworthy.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, leadeater said:

Well to be honest I don't know what the fuss is, math below for why. A typical and conservative DWPD value for consumer SSD would be 0.2 and the Apple M1 devices have been around for what roughly 90 days?

(0.2 * 512GB) * 90 =聽9216GB

(0.2 * 256GB) * 90 = 4608GB

So anyone with less than 4TB of data written is completely fine, your SSD is not wearing out abnormally, even if we use 0.1 DWPD anyone under 2TB is fine. And these DWPD/TBW warranty figures are actually well below what the SSD NAND is capable of.

I don't know what they are reading but I highly doubt anyone has used 13% of their expected SSD life.

Also FYI most SSDs in the consumer market are closer to 0.4 DWPD so.....

I don't know what DWPD stands for but this makes no sense right now. Claiming anyone who's got less than 4TB written is fine seems a bit irellevent when the three examples @Master Disaster聽ran maths on, (however poorly), had values between 14.5 to 37. times. Which if i'm understanding the OP is the whole complaint.

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, leadeater said:

Well to be honest I don't know what the fuss is, math below for why. A typical and conservative DWPD value for consumer SSD would be 0.2 and the Apple M1 devices have been around for what roughly 90 days?

(0.2 * 512GB) * 90 =聽9216GB

(0.2 * 256GB) * 90 = 4608GB

So anyone with less than 4TB of data written is completely fine, your SSD is not wearing out abnormally, even if we use 0.1 DWPD anyone under 2TB is fine. And these DWPD/TBW warranty figures are actually well below what the SSD NAND is capable of.

I don't know what they are reading but I highly doubt anyone has used 13% of their expected SSD life.

Also FYI most SSDs in the consumer market are closer to 0.4 DWPD so.....

WD Black 2TB has 1200TBW. The guy聽with 2TB MBP has 150TBW written so far over 2mo. That is 12.5% of the TBW figure. His drive also used up 3% of spare blocks. If he carries on, the drive will reach 1200TBW in 16 months. After that it's unreliable and the drive could fail anytime (or keep working for another 100s of TBW)

Don't buy Apple M1 computers with 8GB of RAM

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, CarlBar said:

150TB聽in 432 hours is 5.79MB聽per minute.

15.7TB in 191 hours is 1.37 MB聽a minute.

58TB in 256 hours is 3.78MB a Minute.

Not MB but GB 馃槈

PC #1 : Gigabyte Z170XP-SLI | i7-7700 | Cryorig C7 Cu | 16GB DDR4-2400 | LSI SAS 9211-8i | 240GB NVMe M.2 PCIe PNY CS2030 | SSD&HDDs 49.5TB total | Quantum LTO5 HH SAS drive |聽GC-Alpine Ridge | Corsair HX750i | Cooler Master Stacker STC-T01 | ASUS TUF Gaming VG27AQ 2560x1440 @ 60 Hz (plugged HDMI port, shared with PC #2) | Win10
PC #2 : Gigabyte MW70-3S0 | 2x E5-2667 v3 | 2x Intel BXSTS200C | 32GB DDR4-2133 ECC Reg | MSI RTX 3080 Ti Suprim X | 2x 1TB SSD SATA Samsung 870 EVO | Seasonic SSR-850TR | Lian Li PC-A77 | ASUS TUF Gaming VG27AQ 2560x1440 @ 144 Hz (plugged DP port, shared with PC #1) | Win10
PC #3 : Mini PC Zotac 4K | Celeron N3150 | 8GB DDR3L 1600 | 250GB M.2 SATA WD Blue | Sound Blaster X-Fi Surround 5.1 Pro USB | Samsung Blu-ray writer USB |聽Genius SP-HF1800A | TV Panasonic TX-40DX600E UltraHD | Win10
PC #4 : ASUS P2B-F | PIII 500MHz | 512MB SDR 100 | Leadtek WinFast GeForce 256 SDR 32MB | 2x Guillemot Maxi Gamer 3D虏 8MB in SLI | Creative Sound Blaster AWE64 ISA | 80GB HDD UATA | Fortron/Source FSP235-60GI | Zalman R1 | DELL E151FP 15" TFT 1024x768 | Win98SE

Laptop : Lenovo ThinkPad T61p | T9500 | 4GB DDR2 667 | Quadro FX 570m | 120GB SSD OCZ Vertex 2 | 15.4" TFT 1920x1200 | Win10

PC tablet : Fujitsu Point 1600 | PMMX 166MHz | 160MB EDO | 20GB HDD UATA | external floppy drive | 10.4" DSTN 800x600 touchscreen | AGFA SnapScan 1212u blue | Win98SE

Laptop collection #1 : IBM ThinkPad 340CSE | 486SLC2 66MHz | 12MB RAM | 360MB IDE | internal floppy drive | 10.4" DSTN 640x480 256 color | Win3.1 with MS-DOS 6.22

Laptop collection #2 : IBM ThinkPad 380E | PMMX 150MHz | 80MB EDO | NeoMagic MagicGraph128XD | 2.1GB IDE | internal floppy drive | internal CD-ROM drive | Intel PRO/100 Mobile PCMCIA | 12.1" FRSTN 800x600 16-bit color | Win98

Laptop collection #3 : Toshiba T2130CS | 486DX4 75MHz | 32MB EDO | 520MB IDE | internal floppy drive | 10.4" STN 640x480 256 color | Win3.1 with MS-DOS 6.22

And 6 others computers (Intel Compute Stick x5-Z8330, Giada Slim N10 WinXP,聽2 Apple classic and 2 PC pocket WinCE)

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Master Disaster said:

That makes much more sense, I thought was maths must have been off, 2TB per minute is impossible.

I misscarried a number so it's Gigabytes, not Megabytes, still not unrealistic for an SSD.聽Hell you could theoretically just about hit that on old fashioned IDE if you know what that is.

Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, CarlBar said:

I don't know what DWPD stands for but this makes no sense right now. Claiming anyone who's got less than 4TB written is fine seems a bit irellevent when the three examples @Master Disaster聽ran maths on, (however poorly), had values between 14.5 to 37. times. Which if i'm understanding the OP is the whole complaint.

Drive Writes per Day, and I'm telling you now none of those SMART readouts will be incorrect. Hell anyone can prove that easily, just open System Monitor and have it on the side and start using the M1 Mac device, unless you actually see this claimed very large writes then it's a load of crap and people are getting feed bad data.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, leadeater said:

Drive Writes per Day, and I'm telling you now none of those SMART readouts will be correct. Hell anyone can prove that easily, just open System Monitor and have it on the side and start using the M1 Mac device, unless you actually see this claimed very large writes then it's a load of crap and people are getting feed bad data.

If you go down the twitter thread, people are posting kernel_task values from their activity monitor. I restarted my Mac and from what i'm seeing so far, it could be a bug related to how long the machine has been last turned on

Don't buy Apple M1 computers with 8GB of RAM

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now