XPost: comp.os.linux.advocacy, comp.sys.mac.advocacy   
   From: recscuba_google@huntzinger.com   
      
   On 9/3/25 11:06, CrudeSausage wrote:   
   > On 2025-09-03 9:50 a.m., -hh wrote:   
   >> On 9/2/25 16:56, CrudeSausage wrote:   
   >>> On 2025-09-01 1:23 p.m., -hh wrote:   
   >>>> On 9/1/25 08:34, CrudeSausage wrote:   
   >>>>> ...   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> To be fair, Apple's devices can be obtained for a fair price in   
   >>>>> their default configurations. Sure, the storage might be smaller   
   >>>>> than expected and they might have less RAM than computers at the   
   >>>>> same price, but the screen quality and battery life need to be   
   >>>>> considered. However, upgrading that default configuration is   
   >>>>> prohibitively expensive.   
   >>>>   
   >>>> "Expensive" ... if one only focuses on "TB of Storage" and ignores   
   >>>> the net performance levels obtained.   
   >>>>   
   >>>> A classical example is assuming that all SSDs perform the same, so   
   >>>> since one can get a 1TB SATA SSD for $25 at WalMart, that therefore   
   >>>> any other SSD configuration must be a 'rip off'///   
   >>>>   
   >>>>   
   >>>> No matter how much higher its bandwidth is:   
   >>>>   
   >>>> SATA-3 SSD: ~550MB/sec   
   >>>> NVMe PCIe Gen 3 SSD:  ~3,500MB/sec   
   >>>> 2022 Mac Studio M1 Max: ~5000(R) to 6,500(W) MB/sec   
   >>>   
   >>> I notice you omit Gen 4, which was already available on PCs in 2022.   
   >>   
   >> Sure because we've been talking about real world systems that posters   
   >> here like Joel own, and presently I don't own a Gen 4 system yet.   
   >>   
   >> Reason being is a combination of purchase cycles / lifecycles, as well   
   >> as not having an objective performance requirement for it:  as I   
   >> already have mentioned, my current system is capable of 8K video   
   >> editing, and since my best system is capable of 4K, I don't need it yet.   
   >   
   > Since Gen 4 machines have been available for years now with Gen 5 being   
   > the current default, there is no reason to suggest that these kinds of   
   > systems aren't real.   
      
   Its not that Gen4 isn't real, but rather than they're not yet widely   
   deployed long enough yet to have a large enough marketshare in the   
   installed base to make their performance all that relevant yet.   
      
   Its basically because PCI 4 had "bad" timing:  it didn't get deployed on   
   consumer platforms until it had a suitable chipset which was circa early   
   2020...which aligns with the onset of CoVid.  With PCI 4 deployment   
   caught in the supply chain mess, it missed the boat (literally).  The   
   demand surge for telework/school/etc prompted buying "off the shelf" in   
   stock PCs because of timelines & supply chain shortages, and these were   
   PCI 3 systems.   
      
   After 2020, even with supply chains recovering, much of the home PC   
   market was in a lull, because their normal replacement cycles had been   
   disrupted by the 2020 demand surge.  With their home PCs from CoVid now   
   hitting five years old, they're just starting to enter the market for   
   its replacement, which of course will be PCI 4 when they do buy.  With   
   tariffs and an economic downturn risk, there's likely going to be   
   another demand lull.   
      
   For businesses who CoVid-surged PCs too, they will also be factoring in   
   their IRS tax depreciation of five (5) years: (3/2020 +60mo) = 4/2025:   
   this window has literally just opened.   
      
      
   >>> According to the PCI Express table on Wikipedia, they can get to   
   >>> 7,877 GB/s at x4 which is the most common rate. Did you purposefully   
   >>> ignore that information to make the Apple "deal" on storage prices   
   >>> appear better?   
   >>   
   >> Keyword being "can".  My own benchmarking tests have found that I   
   >> "can" hit ~6300 MB/sec, but that's not the minimum.   
   >   
   > I'm nowhere near that for now, but my machine supports PCIe 3.0 x4 at   
   > best. Still, it's more than fast enough for my needs.Which is the whole   
   point:  if one's needs don't merit faster I/O, then   
   one shouldn't be criticizing those who do & pay more for higher I/O.   
      
   Ditto other metrics vulnerable to gross oversimplification, such as   
   claiming that all SSDs are "rip offs" because hard drives are cheaper   
   per TB: on tech-savvy newsgroups, we should be expected to be better.   
      
      
   >>> What about PCI Express 5.0, which is also already available on PCs   
   >>> and doubles that rate?   
   >>   
   >> And "what about" the current M4 series Mac Studio too?   
   >   
   > As far as I know, the Mac Studio is nowhere near as affordable as   
   > typical machine with PCIe 5.0.   
   >   
   > < snip >   
      
   Care to provide an example of one of these "typical" PCIe 5 PCs?   
      
   FWIW, I did spend a little bit of time looking at a Dell Alienware which   
   advertised PCIe 5, but an element which stood out at me was that had a   
   16x lane slot for a GPU, but since PCIe 5 specs are gamer-centric and   
   has up to 16 CPU PCIe 5.0 lanes and up to four CPU PCIe 4.0 lanes, the   
   ramifications here are that if all 16x went to the GPU, that only leaves   
   a PCIe 4 4x slot for its NVMe slot ... which isn't a performance boost   
   at all for onboard storage.   
      
      
   After all, a standard PCIe-5 slot has half the bandwidth of a PCIe-4's   
   4x slot:  ~The Devil's in the Details!~   
      
      
   -hh   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)