M3 iMac 256GB SSD speed

[Macintosh1984]

We know that on the iMac M3 you can act on the RAM and the SSD.

I made my choice, 16GB RAM because it increases performance a lot, not 24GB for my needs and because you don't gain as much speed from 16GB to 24GB as you do from 8GB to 16GB.

For the SSD however, even if I use external HDs, let's remember that by default the operating system is on the internal HD, and therefore if it is slow, the machine suffers, even if the data is on the faster external SSD. For this reason I chose 1TB SSD.

Now I am not clear about the speed of 2TB SSD, to see if it doubles again or not.

Trust me, we don't care about the speed issue, but it is absolutely true that a machine like this, for greater longevity, should have a minimum of 16GB RAM + 1TB SSD.

SSDs, thanks to their speed, have brought many old computers back to life, so yes, the speed of SSDs is very important.

What speed do you experience with 2TB SSD?

 

[Macintosh1984]

Here are my results, we can see a huge difference compared to yours.

Is 256GB?

 

[Ice-Cube]

Fresh from the oven: iMac M3 24GB/1TB/Ventura

 

[Macintosh1984]

Fresh from the oven: iMac M3 24GB/1TB/Ventura View attachment 2311985

I don't know if it's Sonoma or Spotlight that finishes indexing, but the SEQ1M QD1 test may be better for Write than Write than the SEQ1M QD8, so we can be satisfied.

I don't know just 2TB is better. In my case, having updated to Sonoma without formatting, even if the Mac was updated from Ventura "clean", I don't know how it could increase performance. I will now format to the next OS in 2024.

 

[thingstoponder]

We know that on the iMac M3 you can act on the RAM and the SSD.

I made my choice, 16GB RAM because it increases performance a lot, not 24GB for my needs and because you don't gain as much speed from 16GB to 24GB as you do from 8GB to 16GB.

For the SSD however, even if I use external HDs, let's remember that by default the operating system is on the internal HD, and therefore if it is slow, the machine suffers, even if the data is on the faster external SSD. For this reason I chose 1TB SSD.

Now I am not clear about the speed of 2TB SSD, to see if it doubles again or not.

Trust me, we don't care about the speed issue, but it is absolutely true that a machine like this, for greater longevity, should have a minimum of 16GB RAM + 1TB SSD.

SSDs, thanks to their speed, have brought many old computers back to life, so yes, the speed of SSDs is very important.

What speed do you experience with 2TB SSD?

Having an SSD is way more important than the speed of the SSD for how quick a computer feels.

 

[Ice-Cube]

I don't know if it's Sonoma or Spotlight that finishes indexing, but the SEQ1M QD1 test may be better for Write than Write than the SEQ1M QD8, so we can be satisfied.

I don't know just 2TB is better. In my case, having updated to Sonoma without formatting, even if the Mac was updated from Ventura "clean", I don't know how it could increase performance. I will now format to the next OS in 2024.

After using for a day, i've already experienced the spinning wheel twice. I only had outlook, mail, teams, brave, telegram, notes, transmission and firefox opened. Firefox froze on me when I tried to quit, hence the spinning wheel. Never happened on my 2019 Macbook Pro (16gb ram) before. I don't think my usage is considered heavy hence disappointed with the performance so far.

 

[Macintosh1984]

After using for a day, i've already experienced the spinning wheel twice. I only had outlook, mail, teams, brave, telegram, notes, transmission and firefox opened. Firefox froze on me when I tried to quit, hence the spinning wheel. Never happened on my 2019 Macbook Pro (16gb ram) before. I don't think my usage is considered heavy hence disappointed with the performance so far.

But how much free RAM did you have from Activity Monitor?

Of course, from what you say it's Firefox's fault, now how much better it is optimized in ARM, compared to the Intel version, I can't tell you this, for me it's my first Apple Silicon.

I certainly migrated my data by hand and manually installed the latest versions of all the software I use.

 

[Ice-Cube]

But how much free RAM did you have from Activity Monitor?

Of course, from what you say it's Firefox's fault, now how much better it is optimized in ARM, compared to the Intel version, I can't tell you this, for me it's my first Apple Silicon.

I certainly migrated my data by hand and manually installed the latest versions of all the software I use.

I had alot of free memory, but I can see the cpu usage history is higher compared to the exact same usage scenario I had on my macbook pro before.

 

[Gudi]

Here’s my 4-ports M1 iMac (8/256) for comparison.

 

[Macintosh1984]

View attachment 2312099

I had alot of free memory, but I can see the cpu usage history is higher compared to the exact same usage scenario I had on my macbook pro before.


View attachment 2312100

Lots of free RAM is a great thing.

Remember that Apple Silicon have different management than old Intel, with core Performance and Efficiency ones.

I would therefore say that if the app is not optimized well, you may encounter problems.

Even in my case I have seen that the Efficiency cores are mostly used, only when intensively using Photoshop, enlargements, filters, there are peaks of the Performance cores.

I would say that on laptops, such management, the battery thanks, on a desktop, the fan also thanks.

If you think it's not working well in everyday use, try a full format with Sonoma.

Last thing, did you automatically migrate the data or not?

I forgot, especially when you browse, you can find yourself on pages full of videos or other content, advertising, if not optimized, can make the app unstable, and in fact each tab is managed as a separate process.

 

[Gudi]

If you want the 10-core GPU (+$200), 16 GB RAM (+$200) and full-speed SSD (+$200), the price is actually terrible. I’m fine with just 8 GB and 256 GB, but that’s because Swap memory on the M1 SSD is blazing fast. You can no longer say that you basically get the full performance for just one $200 upgrade.

 

[picpicmac]

let's remember that by default the operating system is on the internal HD

Which is why one puts the OS on the external SSD, and set the external SSD as the Startup Disk. Been doing that for 10 years.

 

[Gudi]

Actually the operating system is on its own hidden partition on the internal SSD, protected from user meddling and from malware. Only the update daemon has write access to system files.

 

[Ice-Cube]

Lots of free RAM is a great thing.

Remember that Apple Silicon have different management than old Intel, with core Performance and Efficiency ones.

I would therefore say that if the app is not optimized well, you may encounter problems.

Even in my case I have seen that the Efficiency cores are mostly used, only when intensively using Photoshop, enlargements, filters, there are peaks of the Performance cores.

I would say that on laptops, such management, the battery thanks, on a desktop, the fan also thanks.

If you think it's not working well in everyday use, try a full format with Sonoma.

Last thing, did you automatically migrate the data or not?

I forgot, especially when you browse, you can find yourself on pages full of videos or other content, advertising, if not optimized, can make the app unstable, and in fact each tab is managed as a separate process.

I have a similar setup on my M1 Pro Macbook pro at work and everything runs smoothly, so i didnt think it was anything to do with app optimization. I did a clean install so nothing was migrated over. While the performance was lacklustre, I'm really enjoying the look of the iMac. Now my desk is so clean and clutter free, i love it.

 

[Macintosh1984]

I have a similar setup on my M1 Pro Macbook pro at work and everything runs smoothly, so i didnt think it was anything to do with app optimization. I did a clean install so nothing was migrated over. While the performance was lacklustre, I'm really enjoying the look of the iMac. Now my desk is so clean and clutter free, i love it.

I'm not an Apple engineer, but M3 is not like the transition from M1 to M2, there are many more changes and new technologies, that software optimization is important, we will see more and more apps that will have functions dedicated to those who have M3.

If you think that the power limitation is due to the speed of the SSD or the bandwidth speed of the RAM, I don't know this at the moment.

Certainly iMac still remains an Apple born only with a basic M3, no Pro, no Max.

 

[dumastudetto]

Apple offers a broad range of options to fit every need and budget.

It all starts with the base model iMac that has been precisely engineered to offer customers insane value for a low, low, price. It doesn't have the fastest storage configuration, the most RAM, or the the greatest overall performance. What it does offer customers is an incredible experience powered by macOS, a stunning display and best-in-class accessories such as the keyboard, mouse and trackpad.

Obviously if you care about performance, Apple has your back. They offer incredible upgrade options to build your perfect iMac - fine-tuned to your exact requirements and priorities.

 

[Gudi]

It doesn't have the fastest storage configuration, the most RAM, or the greatest overall performance.

Or the most usb-c ports, the most ethernet, the most gpu cores, the most color options, the most touch-ID, the most fans, the most heat pipes or the most Apple stickers.

Such incredible value at the low-low starting price of $1,299 without taxes and exchange rates. 😁

 

[IngerMan]

My M3 16GB 512SSD Shows about the same as 1TB

 

[Gudi]

My M3 16GB 512SSD Shows about the same as 1TB. 🤷‍♂️

It's the number of chips which limits SSD speed in the entry-level M3 iMacs only.

M1 iMac:
256 GB = 2× 128 GB chips
512 GB = 2× 256 GB chips
1 TB = 2× 512 GB chips
2 TB = 2× 1 TB chips

M3 iMac:
256 GB = 1× 256 GB chip
512 GB = 2× 256 GB chips
1 TB = 2× 512 GB chips
2 TB = 2× 1 TB chips

 

[TrenttonY]

Why are some people on the 256GB SSD getting around 1500mbs while, others are getting 3000mbs?

 

[TrenttonY]

It's the number of chips which limits SSD speed in the entry-level M3 iMacs only.

M1 iMac:
256 GB = 2× 128 GB chips
512 GB = 2× 256 GB chips
1 TB = 2× 512 GB chips
2 TB = 2× 1 TB chips

M3 iMac:
256 GB = 1× 256 GB chip
512 GB = 2× 256 GB chips
1 TB = 2× 512 GB chips
2 TB = 2× 1 TB chips

So to get the same speed that you got on the M1 256GB SSD, you have to custom order and get the 512GB? Am I understanding that right, that the M3 256GB is half the speed of the M1 256GB SSD?

Would it matter to get the base-level M3 iMac with the 512GB SSD, or the mid-level (4 port) M3 iMac with 512GB SSD?

 

[Gudi]

So to get the same speed that you got on the M1 256GB SSD, you have to custom order and get the 512GB?

Yes! The new 256 GB SSD in the M3 iMac is the slowest in any 24" iMac. About half as fast as the other M3 iMacs and about a third slower than all M1 iMacs.

Am I understanding that right, that the M3 256GB is half the speed of the M1 256GB SSD?

Two-thirds the speed of the M1 256GB SSD. The new chips themselves got a little faster, but with only one chip instead of two, the M3 256GB can't even match the speed of the previous generation.

Would it matter to get the base-level M3 iMac with the 512GB SSD, or the mid-level (4 port) M3 iMac with 512GB SSD?

The 2-port model comes with a lot of drawbacks themselves, a binned M3 chip with two fewer GPU cores and only one fan instead of two, with only a heat sink and not a heat pipe. Furthermore the keyboard doesn't come with TouchID by default and the power brick doesn't have an Ethernet port, but both can be ordered extra or bought separately.

Not all M1 iMacs are built the same: Potential buyers of the 2021 Apple iMac 24 should be aware of the cooling system differences that could affect performance

It's debatable whether any of this really effects users as the M-chips run all pretty cool and the SSDs are rather quick anyway and how important is more RAM? But it certainly doesn't feel good to spend so much on a new computer and know, it isn't quite what it could be. So that's how Apple gets you on the upgrade ladder and before you know it, you've paid way too much.

 

[TrenttonY]

Yes! The new 256 GB SSD in the M3 iMac is the slowest in any 24" iMac. About half as fast as the other M3 iMacs and about a third slower than all M1 iMacs.

Two-thirds the speed of the M1 256GB SSD. The new chips themselves got a little faster, but with only one chip instead of two, the M3 256GB can't even match the speed of the previous generation.

The 2-port model comes with a lot of drawbacks themselves, a binned M3 chip with two fewer GPU cores and only one fan instead of two, with only a heat sink and not a heat pipe. Furthermore the keyboard doesn't come with TouchID by default and the power brick doesn't have an Ethernet port, but both can be ordered extra or bought separately.

Not all M1 iMacs are built the same: Potential buyers of the 2021 Apple iMac 24 should be aware of the cooling system differences that could affect performance

It's debatable whether any of this really effects users as the M-chips run all pretty cool and the SSDs are rather quick anyway and how important is more RAM? But it certainly doesn't feel good to spend so much on a new computer and know, it isn't quite what it could be. So that's how Apple gets you on the upgrade ladder and before you know it, you've paid way too much.

Thanks. I’m thinking I’m going with the base model, but upgrading to 16GB/512Gb, and configuring it to also include Touch ID & Ethernet. Most people would find it crazy, but two ports is all I need.

So effectively the only difference then would be 2-less GPU cores, and only having one fan. A base model, fully configured, would be $121 less then the mid-level with the same 16GB/512Gb upgrade configuration. At that point we’re getting into the ridiculous amount (IMO) for an iMac ($2000+).

Coming from a late-2013 13” rMBP, I’m guessing anything from the last 5 years will already feel like quantum computing to me, lol. So hopefully this iMac will last me 5 years. After that, I’ll get the M6 Mac Mini and Studio Display 3. Hopefully by then they allow two inputs, so it can be used with a PC & Mac at the same time!

 

[Gudi]

Thanks. I’m thinking I’m going with the base model, but upgrading to 16GB/512GB, and configuring it to also include Touch ID & Ethernet. Most people would find it crazy, but two ports is all I need.

And it's two Thunderbolt ports nonetheless. I'd only question the decision to combine 16 GB RAM with a suboptimal cooling solution. Any game or app that needs more than 8 plus Swap will tax the processor heavily and create some heat. I'm crazy enough to say 8 GB might be enough for you.

Coming from a late-2013 13” rMBP, I’m guessing anything from the last 5 years will already feel like quantum computing to me, lol.

Absolutely, any 4.5K iMac will feel like living in the future. Don't forget to pick a nice color.

So hopefully this iMac will last me 5 years. After that, I’ll get the M6 Mac Mini and Studio Display 3. Hopefully by then they allow two inputs, so it can be used with a PC & Mac at the same time!

On an Apple monitor? 😳 Jesus Christ! Such a consumer-friendly feature probably needs an EU regulation.

 

[TrenttonY]

And it's two Thunderbolt ports nonetheless. I'd only question the decision to combine 16 GB RAM with a suboptimal cooling solution. Any game or app that needs more than 8 plus Swap will tax the processor heavily and create some heat. I'm crazy enough to say 8 GB might be enough for you.

I won’t be do any major gaming, at most Civilization V. Plus, I refuse to even install that bloatware, AKA Steam on my new Mac. I won’t be doing any major video exporting or image editing either. So, 16GB may be more than I need, but I don’t want any regrets in the future. Plus, macOS seems to get more and more chunky every year, ex. live wallpapers. Who knows what it’ll require in the next 2-5 years. If only gave us 12GB/512GB standard…or at least lowers the cost for upgrades to only $100 and not $200…