Buy what you can't personally upgrade !

stupid prices even for 8gb ram :/ crazy company

@@adredy Too be fair its crazy fast RAM that is also soldered with direct access to the every component in the SOC since its all built together. Memory upgrades cost the same from others like Dell and HP so tbh it doesn't matter

@@spencerrr9878 Yeah, it costs the same as Dell and HP because those companies are copying Apple's insane ripoff prices.

@@spencerrr9878 Dell and HP will accept a dirt-cheap SODIMM memory module, that costs just a *fraction* what Apple charges. 8gb from Apple: $200 USD 8gb from Amazon: $15 USD

But at the same time, any professional video editor, which is literally none of these reviewers or forum lurkers criticising the 256GB model, would always use an external as a scratch drive.

How do you do that? Symlink?

@@D-One You search on google how to do it :) - I don't think symlinks are necessary - just settings. Always backup your data first to a separate backup HD.

@@wavesequencer -.- It's just right-clicking on the User profile under "User & Groups" in system settings and selecting "Advanced Options". Thanks anyway.

@@D-One Cool - glad you found it - I don't have my Mac to hand and don't currently do it that way, but I would definitely move home folder off the internal HD if I got a Mac silicon based system.

Also... moving home, doesn't move apps.. you have to do that manually.

I'm just wondering, how the drive performs when you run the entire OS from the drive. I'm interested in understanding how this would work. How does it perform when the system uses the main drive for cache?

of course:)

Oh wow I did not know you can set up a different drive for the cache, that would solve the issues with external SSDs

Welcome aboard!

Glad it was helpful!

Couldn't you use the internal ssd only for OS and swap and install the programs and apps on the external ssd ?

Any proof links on that? Apple Silicon SSD controller is not any faster than any other top SSD controllers.

Thanks for the sub!

No problem!

Glad you liked it

@@AZisk now i gotta think too hard for either another mini or go for the studio 🤔. I’m a retired hardware/software engineer so i think I answered my dilemma… studio. Only concern i have is all the talk about no more updates and support for the studio. But updating the studio to an m2 chip really going to make huge leap for the studio? Im a drummer so using chained electronic drum modules via midi to DAWs. And always compiling for addons and my 3d printer. Studio should last for a number of years. I have 2 old minis retired. 4k retina imac, older imac and MacBook air still using but its time to upgrade 👍

@@rondeangelis7384 studio sounds like a bit overkill for what you’re doing, but it would last you longer, esp if you develop a video editing hobby :)

@@AZisk oh god not another hobby. Learning 3d modeling for 3d printing.. thats enough for now lol But will keep thinking on configurations for mini m2. 16gig ram, external ssd maybe thats the ticket 🤔 thankx for inputs

thanks! great info!

I'm confused though - whilst I agree a single 1TB non-parallel drive would be less efficient that a x4 internal parallel 1TB drive - this video shows that a non-parallel 1TB external drive was being massively outperformed in SWAP efficiency by the internal 256GB non-parallel drive. So in this case, the issue cant have anything to do with parallels, as Alex's memory pressure and SWAP usage was considerably better on the smaller, slower, still non-parallel drive. I'm confused as to what actually caused the SWAP slowdowns and memory pressure on the external drive?

@@beelzzebub I think problem lies in SLC cache of these SSDs. In reality, on Samsung 970 Evo it's SLC cache is only 6 GB - and this is where Alex saw drastical drop in performance. No, so called “intelligent Turbowrite“ isn't going to help. That and probably coupled with the enclosure - maybe overheating caused this too?

Or, the 200 IQ guy would choose a super-fast Windows machine instead. 90% of the world prefers Windows.

Don't overlook the second half of the video where Alex shows the negative impact on swap with macOS installed on external drive.

My M2 Mini (16/512) will be delivered next week. I want to set it up to get the most out of it as is possible. Aside from mundane Word & Excel work I do a fair bit of image editing. Nothing that should be too taxing for this machine. Is the consensus set up to leave the OS on the internal SSD and put the home directory and applications on a TB4 NVMe drive? I’m a little concerned about apps and later app updates losing track of what’s where?

Thanks, will do!

+1 my first thought

Ran the same tests on internal, didn't see the same problems.

@@AZisk Can you benchmark your internal and external SSDs for random Reads/writes on different QDs and compare, maybe that's the reason why external is slower. 970 evo is fast on sequential, but not particularly fast on random

Problem is not external drive itself that much. Problem in Alex case was huge, abnormal swap which depleted SLC cache on the 970 Evo. With 16 GB of RAM, 980 Pro (which doesn’t drop performance as 970 Evo when cache is full) you shouldn’t have any problems at all.

im pretty impressed with these speeds. i moved 180GB in a minute or so.

@@AZisk agree. Also tested the same way with your favorite time command ))) And temperature is also good. I’ve applied the thickest thermal pad from the kit and regular temperature is in range 37-43 celsius. The highest one is 56 degrees after 15 min benchmark test.

I think this was unclear in the video....1TB drive ($400) added to base machine ($600) is $1000. Buying external 40gbps enclosure and 1TB NVME would be about $200 so this is 50% of the cost of the Apple upgrade. 2TB NVMe would be $150-$200 that that would be a much bigger saving over the $800 Apple charges for 2TB.

Yes you’ll be swapping a lot. They really dropped the ball on the base model. I wouldn’t touch anything with less than 16GB memory. Yes 8 will work but now you’re pressuring a garbage SSD. Oh and don’t forget you can’t replace any of it yourself when it fails! My wife’s M1 mini routinely uses over 8GB ram for basic office work tasks. I made her get the 16GB ram and 1TB SSD for the princely sum Apple charges though because I didn’t want to buy again in 18 months.

I would not think too much about swap being used, i would care much more about AVOIDING SWAP at all cost. As i got my 16" M1 Pro base model i was also scared a bit im running out of the 16GB shared RAM, and in fact i can trigger it (editing a video in FCP while enhancing a 4k video with Topaz Video Enhance AI and many browser tabs opened) I used like 7-10GB swap on top of the used 16GB Ram and the machine also slowed down noticable (Swap on internal SSD) Its funny tho... if the Swap is just used for non processing stuff the machine even handles well with 5GB swap used, if more than 16GB Ram are "needed" for the processing of whatever, the machine still slows down, depending only on how much Swap is used and how much acess is needed on the swap. Compared to a TB4 SSD enclosure for swap with a 1TB SSD i barely noticed a difference in performance loss when the task and Ram/Swap usage was similar, but 2000MB/s are still damn fast. I would just go for a 16GB, better 24 or 32GB RAM upgrade and enjoy a long lasting (in Ram size and its performance) machine. If i would have to buy another M1 Pro MacBook today, i would probably buy at least a 1TB SSD/32GB Ram version instead of the base model. 16GB are nowadays just the ABSOLUTE MINIMUM amount of Ram a machine should have, and considering apple targets the MacBook Pros to "professionals".... 24, better 32GB should have been already minimum standard.

@@harrison00xXx You Can't really avoid swap in MACos, even if you have hundreds gigs of RAM MACos still using it.

@@paulf3353 Its ok if its used, but it depends on the workload and if data in the swap file are also accessed and used for processing. I have actually also 3GB swap used, despite the ram is only filled 7GB out of 16, but thats a lot of stationary, not yet used/needed data so the performance isnt affected and the 3,x GB swap used doesnt change much in use. So i meant basically that your Ram is better enough for the workload you are throwing at the machine, not the 30 browser tabs

I’m guessing the components on the board are a little more integrated, which is why there’s less penalty using swap with the internal ssd. Swap using the external drive probably involves a less well integrated/optimized external component, which may explain the why swap is less efficient with the external.

And thanks for a wonderfully didactic video!

Interesting, is it possible? That is to say, use the internal ssd only for OS and swap ?