[akamel]

They are not 'suspicious' they really are that fast compared to the standard cheap SSDs.

It's the difference between cheap SATA SSDs and expensive NVMe PCIe SSDs.

Search for comps on any online retailer and you'll see how expensive and fast those are.

[masklinn]

> It's the difference between cheap SATA SSDs and expensive NVMe PCIe SSDs.

> Search for comps on any online retailer and you'll see how expensive and fast those are.

$250 for a 1TB 970 EVO Plus. Which has better write throughput.

[akamel]

Here is what Lenevo charges for a similar upgrade using a slightly slower SSD

https://imgur.com/a/ug87MaI

That 250$ more to upgrade to the 1tb from the 512gb.

the retail price of the upgrade is 450$

[masklinn]

So… they charge half the price Apple does, and if you don't want to pay it you don't have to care because it's a standard m.2 so you can swap it with a retail drive (at which point you have both the original and the replacement for 50% more storage at a lower price), which you can't do with a soldered Apple drive.

[akamel]

You are moving the goal posts of the original comment.

OP said it's a 50$ upgrade.

It is not.

It's a 450$ retail price and 250$ sale price for a slightly slower SSD.

Yes, companies make money when they do things for you.

[masklinn]

> OP said it's a 50$ upgrade.

And OP was wrong, that doesn't make you right:

> They are not 'suspicious' they really are that fast compared to the standard cheap SSDs.

They're not that fast compared to SSDs retailing for half the price of the upgrade.

> Search for comps on any online retailer and you'll see how expensive and fast those are.

I did and they're not.

> It's a 450$ retail price and 250$ sale price for a slightly slower SSD.

No matter how much you hate it, it's still a $250 retail price: https://www.newegg.com/samsung-970-evo-plus-1tb/p/N82E168201... And a $125 upgrade: https://www.newegg.com/samsung-970-evo-plus-500gb/p/N82E1682...

[ksec]

Not to mention those are retail prices, not wholesale prices. Which includes Retailer or Distributor's margin.

[jpalomaki]

Looks like the test is done by just copying a large file and measuring the time it took. This, of course, gives some idea of performance, but they are quite many things that can affect the results.

On the original article[1] the table also shows results from a synthetic benchmark. This shows 2.6GB/s for Macbook and 1.2GB/s for Dell XPS. They also mention that it's a bit apple vs oranges, since different tools were used for the benchmark.

[1] https://www.laptopmag.com/articles/2018-macbook-pro-benchmar...