From the outside, the Phantom Drive, created by Rootkit Labs, appears like a boring old USB. It has that classic, cheap plastic-feeling look to it that would never make you second-guess its intention; when you plug it in, it shows up as just an 8GB drive. However, under the hood, the Phantomdrive is powered by a microSD card that only unlocks itself when you specifically create a new text file, after which it mounts the secret partition, which comes with AES-256 encryption. It's made for situations and places where you might be forced to reveal the contents of a storage device.
The Phantomdrive is built using the CH569 microcontroller that has a bunch of different hardware blocks — this project uses the USB3, SD/eMMC, and the AES block. There are no NAND chips directly onboard the custom PCB because of the ongoing component crisis. Instead, the Phantomdrive relies on a simple microSD card (that you provide; it doesn't come with one) for both its 8GB decoy partition and the hidden partition. The creator does say they'll make a version with eMMC modules once prices come down.
Of course, if someone were to open up the drive, they'd be able to physically rip the SD card out. However, it still wouldn't be a dead giveaway since many cheap USBs are powered by microSD cards, and SD card adapters are also a thing. Anyhow, the finished drive looks pretty simple from the inside; it comprises a USB port, two buck supplies, a button for firmware update, the microSD card, UART test points, and some support components. The custom firmware now comes into play.
Rootkit LabsRootkit Labs
The name of the game is interception. The firmware doesn't know it's being used to handle file transfers; it just reads raw packets of data being sent over the USB bus as is. It's coded to always look for a "password" string, so as soon as you create the unlock.txt file with "password:xyz" inside, it detects the "xyz" bit and copies it over to SRAM, while overwriting the raw data with a bunch of zeroes before it's written to the SD card. The operating system thinks it's created the new file, but the firmware intercepted it midway and sent essentially nothing to the physical storage cells.
The firmware uses the unique internal hardware ID of the microcontroller as the salt, combines it with the password you just typed, and runs the pair through PBKDF2-HMAC-SHA-256 hashes 100,000 times (you can also select 600,000 times) to create a key. Each run induces an intentional 2-3 second delay to deter brute-force attacks that would try to crack the password. The key is used to unlock and lock the hidden partition, and since it's tied to the silicon itself, putting the SD card into another Phantom Drive will not unlock it.
(Image credit: Rootkit Labs)
Even if you try to access it directly through a microSD card slot, it will stay hidden, and the 8GB decoy will actually appear like a broken partition. The creator has also provided the option to recompile the firmware on your own to spoof specific vendor IDs, so that the USB appears like it's from different brands. You can make the Phantomdrive pretend to be a cheap 16GB Kingston Datatraveler at the hardware protocol level, at which point no scanning software will flag it as anything more than a cheap USB.
There are Linux-based C tools you can use in case of emergency, however, to recover your data, such as physical damage to the board. The transfer speeds are also very limited because the project is built over USB 2 — 20 MB/s reads and 9 MB/s writes in AES-CTR mode. The speeds fall to 10 MB/s reads and 6 MB/s writes in AES-XTS, but at least you have the freedom to choose between the two according to your needs.
You can buy the Phantomdrive from Rootkit Labs for $50, but you can also build your own, since this is an open-source project. The prebuilt device comes with two extra shells because the pins wear off and break quickly. Otherwise, the GitHub repo provides all the resources, including the PCB layout files and schematics, the BOM for every part, and the custom firmware, alongside its related tools.
The creator of Phantomdrive, Ryan Walker, explains the goal behind the project as both utilitarian and political. It's built using entirely open-source software and with inexpensive, easily accessible components. They wanted to create something that could "slip past authoritarian government representatives, corrupt police, and anyone else that doesn't respect basis encryption rights."
Renting cloud storage from Google or Dropbox means a monthly charge that never stops and files a company can scan whenever it likes. Internxt is a private, encrypted alternative, and a lifetime subscription to its 10TB plan is on sale for $359.99 (reg. $2,900).
Your files get end-to-end encrypted on your Mac before they ever leave the device, so only you can open them, and not even Internxt can read them. That encryption goes a step past the standard AES-256 most providers use, holding up against future quantum computing threats. Internxt is open-source with its code posted publicly on GitHub, and they’ve even been audited independently by Securitum.
You can reach your files from macOS, iOS, Windows, Linux, or a browser, across as many devices as you want. Files are split into smaller encrypted pieces during transfer, so intercepted data stays unreadable. Because the system is decentralized, your data isn’t locked to one server, and you can export everything whenever you like. This plan is open to new users only.
Stop renting your storage by the month and own it outright.
You can show hidden files on Mac with a simple keyboard shortcut. You do not need Terminal, an administrator password, or advanced technical knowledge for the most common method.
macOS hides some files because they contain settings, app information, or system resources that people do not normally need to open. These items remain on the Mac, but Finder does not display them during regular use.
You may need to see them when following troubleshooting instructions, opening the hidden Library folder, managing website files, checking app settings, or finding data left behind by an uninstalled application. Once the files are visible, you should avoid deleting anything unless you understand its purpose.
Show Hidden Files Without Terminal
Finder has a built-in shortcut that reveals hidden files and folders instantly. It is the fastest method when you only need temporary access.
To show hidden files in the current Finder folder:
Finder > Open Any Folder > Command + Shift + Period (.)
The period is the regular full-stop key on the keyboard. You must press Command, Shift, and Period at the same time.
The folder will update immediately. Hidden items normally appear lighter or more transparent than regular files. This visual difference helps you recognize files that macOS does not usually display.
The shortcut works in most Finder locations, including the user’s Home folder and some folders on external drives. It can also work inside the Open and Save windows presented by Mac applications.
If you do not see any changes, try the shortcut inside your Home folder. The available hidden items depend on the apps and services used on the Mac.
To open your Home folder:
Finder > Go > Home
After the Home folder opens, use the hidden-file shortcut again. You may see items with names that begin with a period, including configuration folders created by applications.
Files beginning with a period are commonly called dot files. macOS and Unix-based applications use them to store settings and other information without filling normal folders with technical data.
The Finder shortcut acts as a visibility switch. Using it a second time conceals the files again.
To hide the files after you finish:
Finder > Open Any Folder > Command + Shift + Period (.)
Hiding the files does not delete them. Finder simply returns to its normal view.
Image Credit: AppleMagazine
Open the Hidden Library Folder
The user Library is one of the most frequently accessed hidden folders on a Mac. It stores app preferences, browser information, caches, containers, saved states, Mail resources, and other data connected to the signed-in account.
You can open the Library directly without making every hidden file visible.
To open your personal Library folder:
Finder > Go > Press and Hold Option > Library
The Library option appears in the Go menu while you hold the Option key. Select Library before releasing the key.
This method opens the Library belonging to the current user. Its path is ~/Library, where the tilde represents the user’s Home folder.
The user Library is different from the Library folder located at the top level of the startup disk. The top-level folder contains resources that can be shared by different accounts, while ~/Library primarily contains information for the current account.
Deleting content from the Library can reset an app or remove locally stored information. If troubleshooting instructions tell you to remove a file, confirm its name and location before making any changes.
Open a Specific Hidden Folder
Finder includes a Go to Folder feature for opening locations that are difficult to find manually. It is useful when you know the folder’s exact path and do not want to reveal every hidden item.
To open the Go to Folder field:
Finder > Go > Go to Folder
You can also reach the same field with a keyboard shortcut.
To open Go to Folder from the keyboard:
Finder > Shift + Command + G
A small field will appear. Type or paste the path of the location you want to open, then press Return.
To open your personal Library:
Go to Folder > Enter ~/Library > Press Return
To open the hidden SSH folder in your Home folder:
Go to Folder > Enter ~/.ssh > Press Return
The .ssh folder stores information used by Secure Shell tools. It may not exist if SSH software has never created it on the Mac. Finder displaying an error for this path does not necessarily indicate a problem.
To open the Library shared by all users:
Go to Folder > Enter /Library > Press Return
Pay attention to the beginning of each path. ~/Library opens the Library inside the current user’s Home folder. /Library opens the shared Library at the top level of the startup disk.
You can also paste a longer path supplied by an app developer or support technician. Check the spelling carefully because similarly named folders may contain completely different data.
Image Credit: AppleMagazine
Show Hidden Files With Terminal
Terminal can change Finder’s hidden-file preference so concealed items remain visible until you change the setting again. This option is helpful during longer troubleshooting or development sessions.
Terminal is included with macOS and can be opened from the Utilities folder.
To open Terminal:
Finder > Applications > Utilities > Terminal
A Terminal window will appear with a text prompt. Enter the command exactly as presented and press Return.
To keep hidden files visible in Finder:
defaults write com.apple.finder AppleShowAllFiles -bool true && killall Finder
Finder will close briefly and reopen. This restart allows the new visibility preference to take effect.
The command does not change the files themselves. It tells Finder to display items that macOS normally conceals.
You can reverse the change at any time.
To hide the files in Finder again:
defaults write com.apple.finder AppleShowAllFiles -bool false && killall Finder
Finder will restart once more and return to its regular view.
If Finder does not behave as expected after changing the preference, you can remove the custom value. macOS will then use its default behavior.
To remove the custom hidden-file preference:
defaults delete com.apple.finder AppleShowAllFiles && killall Finder
Terminal may say that the preference does not exist if no custom value is stored. That message simply means there is no setting to remove.
See Hidden Files Only in Terminal
Terminal can list hidden files without making them appear in Finder. This can be helpful when checking whether a file exists while leaving Finder unchanged.
The ls command displays the contents of a folder. Adding -a includes hidden items, while -l displays details such as permissions, ownership, file size, and modification date.
To list visible and hidden items in your Home folder:
ls -la ~
The results appear inside Terminal. Names beginning with a period are hidden during normal Finder use.
To list the contents of the folder currently open in Terminal:
ls -la
These commands only display information. They do not delete or modify the files shown in the results.
Work Safely With Hidden Mac Files
A hidden file is not automatically unnecessary, suspicious, or safe to delete. macOS and installed applications conceal many items to protect settings and reduce clutter.
The .DS_Store file, for example, can store Finder display information for a folder. External drives may include folders such as .Trashes and .Spotlight-V100, which macOS uses for Trash and Spotlight features.
Removing the wrong item can reset an application, delete local information, interrupt syncing, or cause macOS to rebuild a database. Copy an item to a safe location before changing it when troubleshooting instructions require manual file work.
Some system folders remain protected even when Finder displays them. Showing hidden files does not bypass administrator permissions or System Integrity Protection. There is no need to disable Mac security features simply to view a hidden folder.
Applications can also contain internal resources. These files are stored inside an app bundle and are different from standard hidden files.
To view the internal contents of an application:
Finder > Applications > Control-click the App > Show Package Contents
Changing files inside an app bundle can prevent the application from opening. If you need one of its resources, copy that file elsewhere instead of editing the original.
When you finish working, return Finder to its regular view to reduce the chance of accidentally moving or deleting a configuration file.
To hide all revealed files with the Finder shortcut:
Finder > Open Any Folder > Command + Shift + Period (.)
TerraMaster’s F4-425 is a fast, versatile, four-bay storage, backup and media streaming NAS box that’s every bit as good as, if not better than similar units from QNAP and Synology. Especially as the company doesn’t gouge you for IP cam licenses.
Price When Reviewed
This value will show the geolocated pricing text for product undefined
Price comparison from over 24,000 stores worldwide
Product
Price
Price comparison from Backmarket
I’m always surprised how few people own a NAS (Network Attached Storage) box such as the highly capable F4-425 Pro reviewed here. NAS requires a bit more tech savvy than cloud services and storage, plus some upfront cost, but there’s one particular reason it’s worth it: complete and private control of the apps, services, and most importantly –the data you store on it.
Internet outage? Doesn’t affect your NAS. Online data breech? Doesn’t affect your NAS. Monthly payments? Only to your power company. Simply put, NAS is fantastic for data backup and streaming media about the house and can also serve as the engine for a home surveillance network.
We like NAS, and TerraMaster has quickly become one of our favorite consumer flavors thanks to excellent hardware and apps, a newly faster OS, and the lack of surcharges vendors such as QNAP and Synology hit you up with for things such as additional IP cam licenses.
That said, there was the occasional immaturity in the apps and operating system.
What are the F4-425 Pro’s features?
The F4-425 Pro is a silver and black hued, mostly metal, four-bay NAS box with quick swap, non-locking 3.5-inch drive trays. It measures approximately 7.1-inches wide by 8.6-inches deep, by 5.9-inches tall and weighs around 6.5 pounds bare. That will of course increase as you add drives.
If you remove the four screws on the bottom holding the aluminum body to the chassis, you’ll find three PCIe 3.0 NVMe M.2 slots that accept NVMe SSDs. There’s enough space for heat sinks, which would be a good idea to prolong SSD life. Note that you can use PCIe 4.0/5.0 SSDs but they’ll be limited to PCIe 3.0 speed.
The front of the unit provides access to the four drive bays, as well as the power button and a single 10Gbps USB Type-A port. The back is home to an additional pair of 10Gbps Type-A USB ports, twin 5Gbe Ethernet ports, and HDMI port (console use only), and a single Type-C port for diagnostics and the like. There’s also the power jack, a pinhole reset button, and a rather massive exhaust fan.
The back of the F4-425 Pro with its dual 2.5Gbpe and 10GBps Type-A ports. There’s a Type-C port but it’s only for diagnostics. The HDMI port is for console (command prompt) use only.
The processor inside of our test unit was a capable 8-core Intel N350 with a substantial 16GB of DDR5 onboard. That’s plenty of power for advanced tasks like virtual machines and Docker.
TerraMaster also provides several apps for backup up mobile devices, and even controlling the box.
The TNAS mobile app on install and first use.
TerraMaster provides 2-year warranty on the F4-425 Pro. And thankfully, the company now also provides a downloadable PDF user’s guide.
How is the F4-425 Pro’s setup?
Adding drives to the tool-less trays is largely painless: slide them out, pop out the side rails, slip in the 3.5-inch HDD and replace the side rails. Screws are provided for 2.5-inch hard drives or SATA SSDs. As described above, you’ll need to remove the outer shell to access the three PCIe 3.0 NVMe slots.
lWhen you first boot the F4-425 (and most TerraMaster NAS) it presents a dialog asking for your email address to receive a code. That’s of course after you find its IP address (E.g. 192/168.1.110) and visit with your browser. Below the email field, in very light lettering, is the ability to bypass this step.
If you choose, you can activate your online presence with TerraMaster during setup.
Alas, you still have to enter your email. I don’t like sending info to a company until I’m very familiar with the hardware and said company. I wish TerraMaster would abandon this practice ad to be blunt–it’s none of their darn business.
To be fair, you can put the F4-425 Pro into “Security Isolation Mode” (Control Panel / Security/ Security Isolation Mode) after setup, to prevent any further traffic outside of your local network. The F4-425 also features a highly configurable firewall if that’s too drastic a measure for you.
What is the F4-425 Pro’s operating system and software like?
The F4-425 Pro delivered our first look at the latest version 7 of TOS (TerraMaster Operating System), a substantially feature-equivalent but far better-performing version of the operating system (version 6) than I tested with the F2-425. Especially in regards multitasking.
Beyond that, it appeared to me to be more evolutionary than revolutionary, despite heralding itself as the first AI-enabled NAS OS. It does allow you to install OpenCLAW which enables normal language access to various features.
TerraMaster says OpenCLAW makes things easier, but the real issue with most new NAS users is that they don’t know what to ask, let alone how to ask it. Actually, thinking about it, that’s the issue with just about any AI system. Note also that the minute I opened OpenCLAW, the F4-425 Pro’s fan kicked into high gear. It takes some juice.
That said, I quite like TOS, it’s as well laid out as the QNAP and Synology equivalents, and perhaps a bit more intuitive. However, I found version 7 a bit buggy. Rough around the edges, as it were.
I stuck with TOS 7 as it’s so much quicker at everything than version 6 but there were some annoyances such as the inability to include spaces in a backup job name, and not automatically resuming jobs that were not completed in the last session. I’d also be careful doing searches and deleting the results with the file manager.
There are also tons of apps for backup, surveillance, development, and multimedia streaming. Below is my favorite: Centralized Backup, which can back up from numerous sources (SMB, FTP, etc.) without the need to install clients on every machine. Simply share the folders or files you want across the network, locate them and create a job to back them up.
I love Centralized Backup’s ability to back up my shared folders without me having to install client software on the involved computers.
Centralized Backup, along with CloudSync (back up to a host of online services) are my favorite TOS backup apps, but there are quite a few others (Duple Vault, Elephant Drive, etc.) as well as TerraMaster’s own client-based, portal driven TerraSync. There’s also a handy folder mirroring utility (TFM) that you can use across volumes.
eAll the backup and sync options offered by TOS 7.
Want to keep tabs on your house? TerraMaster includes Surveillance Manager (shown below), which offers support for unlimited cameras. This is in distinct contrast to Synology and QNAP which limit you to one or two cameras so they can sell you more licenses. This is one of the best reasons to opt for a TerraMaster NAS box, however, note that you’ll have to configure your router to reach the app remotely.
The Surveillance Manager opens in a separate tab and allows up to tk IP cams.
While I use TOS’s DLNA Multimedia Server to stream movies to my TV, TerraMaster also includes the extremely popular Plex (shown below), as well as Jellyfin and Emby for fans of those systems.
The extremely popular Plex Media Server is present in TOS 7.
TRAID is TerraMaster’s hybrid RAID solution (all NAS vendors have one these days) that combines mirroring (RAID 1) and parity (RAID 5). It allows you to combine drives of different sizes while using more of their capacity than standard RAID modes do.
Generally speaking, most RAID modes allow you to use only the capacity of each drive in the array equal to that of the smallest drive in the array. Combine a 4TB HDD and an 8TB HDD in RAID 0 (striping) or RAID 1 (mirroring), and only 4TB of the 8TB drive is used, while the rest just sits there. TRAID and similar solutions let you employ the otherwise wasted capacity as another volume, or part of one.
How much is the F4-425?
The F4-425 Pro with the Intel N350 retails for $799, but was on sale at TerraMaster’s site for $639 at the time of this writing. From TerraMaster’s Amazon store make that $699.
There’s a cheaper $569 Intel N305/8GB version of the F4-425 Pro available, as well as less endowed $599 F4-425 Plus (Intel N150 processor, 16GB), and $429 F4-425 (quad-core, 4GB) models if the Pro is too pricey for you, or you don’t need to run VMs, Docker, etc.
The Plus and plain versions were discounted to $480 and $344 respectively at the time of this writing. All use the same operating system and offer the same applications.
The F4-425 Pro’s price is roughly on par for a NAS box with this grade of processor, 16GB of memory and NVMe slots, but as always — shop around, though we’re fairly sure you’d be happiest with the TerraMaster.
How does the F4-425 perform?
The F4-425 Pro features dual 5Gbpe (Multi-gig) so it’s capable of nearly 600MBps when using that protocol, and around 1GBps if you aggregate the two 5Gbps Ethernet adapters. At 2.5Gbps, expect around 290MBps, and on gigabit, around 140Mbps.
There’s no Wi-Fi, but that’s not the best way to use a NAS box. You can with some (and an add-in card), but commonly NAS is connected via Ethernet directly to a router or switch.
I populated the F4-425 with a single 1.92GB Seagate IronWolf SATA SSD and two Crucial T710 PCIe 5.0 NVMe SSDs (running at PCIe 3.0 speed) and formatted with the Btrfs file system. All those SSDs are massively faster than 5Gbpe or even 10Gbpe. The test network consisted of my M4 Max Studio, an EnGenius ECS2512FP 12-port switch (8 x 2.5Gbe/4 x 10Gbe), and PCWorld’s 10Gbe Intel testbed.
I tested with both a single 5Gbe Ethernet connection and both 5Gbe Ethernet ports bonded using TOS 7. However, there was so little improvement with the ports bonded, I’m showing only the 5Gbe results. As to that…
Disk Speed Test was quite complimentary of the F4-425’s throughput, and more so than AmorphousDiskMark.
Disk Speed Test was complimentary of the F4-425’s throughput, and more so than AmorphousDiskMark.
AmorphousDiskMark writes more data at a time than Disk Speed Test, which may be the reason for the lower write number. That said, CrystalDiskMark on the PC showed even greater performance that Disk Speed Test — 587MBps reading and 580GBps writing.
AmorphousDiskMark writes more data at a time than Disk Speed Test, which may be the reason for the lower write number. That said, CrystalDiskMark on the PC showed even greater performance that Disk Speed Test — 587MBps reading and 470GBps writing.
ATTO was more in line with Disk Speed Test than AmorphousDiskMark.
ATTO was more in line with Disk Speed Test than AmorphousDiskMark.
As to sprightlyness, I banged on the interface and apps pretty hard. The F4-425 Pro was extremely responsive. Tasks completely quickly, including firmware updates and reboots. The latter were far faster than what I’m used to with my older NAS boxes. Multi-tasking, which I complained about with TOS 6 on the F2-425 was light years better. Thank you TOS 7! And of course, more memory and a faster processor.
TerraMaster’s advertising teases over 1GBps performance. However, that’s simply totaling two separate 500GBps connections working separately. Expect what you see above.
Note also that there is a list of compatible NVMe SSDs found here. I’ve had issues with the F8 SSD Plus with some that weren’t supported, though the F4-425 seems fine with the same SSDs. I also found that some software required re-enabling after reboots or shutdowns in TOS 7.
Should I buy the F4-425 Pro?
If you need a very fast 4-Bay NAS box, the TerraMaster F4-425 fits the bill. Though you should expect a couple of software glitches here and there with TOS 7 that QNAP and Synology don’t suffer. That said, for creating a surveillance system, the lack of additional fees makes it top dog in that department.
Tesla has started building its next-generation Megapack 3 grid battery, with the first units rolling off the line at the company’s new Megafactory in Brookshire, Texas.
The plant went from groundbreaking to production in 16 months and is designed to build 50 GWh of Megapack 3 a year. That’s the version Tesla says packs roughly 28% more energy into the same footprint as the Megapack it replaces.
Sandisk arrives running hot to the M.2 2230 SSD segment. A spiritual successor to the popular WD Black SN770M, the Optimus GX 7100M invokes memories of the laptop champion WD Black SN7100 with tested and true hardware. Does the class-leading responsiveness and power efficiency carry over to the smaller factor? Portable gaming system owners can rest easy knowing that it does.
We don’t want to confuse WD and Sandisk here, even if the hardware – and software, for that matter – is similar and often shared. Sandisk is making its own mark, and the Optimus GX 7100M, or 7100M for short, is proof of that. While there were few options available in the M.2 2230 form factor when the Steam Deck launched, there would soon be almost too many. Sandisk didn’t have to release this drive, but we’re glad it did, because it does fill an important hole in the lineup where alternatives have become harder to find.
This is a high-end Gen 4 drive, or as high-end as this segment gets. It’s still DRAM-less but can push the full bandwidth of the interface at both capacities. Where it shines is in its random read performance. That’s the key metric for responsiveness or real-world feel, and especially for game-focused hardware, it means the fastest loading times possible. Portable systems also need to use as little power as possible to reduce heat generation and prolong battery life. The 7100M’s pedigree is great there, too. And while 2TB was once hard to find in this form factor, because drives need to be single-sided with just one NAND flash package, the 7100M handles that and does it with faster TLC rather than lower-endurance QLC flash.
It’s a powerhouse of a product. The reason we say it fills a hole is that the alternatives are hard to find. The Crucial P310 still tends to be a great choice, but the parent company is moving away from the retail space due to AI and enterprise demand. The P310 is also QLC-based, which, while not a big deal anymore, does limit its performance in some cases and means reduced endurance. TLC-based alternatives with Phison’s E27T controller, like the Corsair MP600 Mini, are harder to find and don’t quite match that random read performance. SMI’s competing controller is more often used in budget products, where you can find it, like the Kingston NV3. The 7100M is left as the clear winner if you want the very best – especially if you like its strong software package – with no real drawbacks.
Sandisk Optimus GX 7100M Specifications
Product
1TB
2TB
Pricing
$229.99
$449.99
Form Factor
M.2 2230 (Single-sided)
M.2 2230 (Single-sided)
Interface / Protocol
PCIe 4.0 x4 / NVMe 2.0
PCIe 4.0 x4 / NVMe 2.0
Controller
SanDisk Proprietary
SanDisk Proprietary
DRAM
N/A (HMB)
N/A (HMB)
Memory
Sandisk 218-Layer TLC (BiCS8)
Sandisk 218-Layer TLC (BiCS8)
Sequential Read
7,250 MB/s
7,250 MB/s
Sequential Write
6,900 MB/s
6,900 MB/s
Random Read
1,000K
1,000K
Random Write
1,300K
1,300K
Security
TCG Pyrite 2.01
TCG Pyrite 2.01
Endurance (TBW)
600TB
1,200TB
Power (R/W)
3.5W / 3.8W
3.7W / 4.0W
Part Number
SDSP71100TAT
SDSP71200TAT
Warranty
5-Year
5-Year
M.2 2230 SSDs are generally limited to a small range of capacities, and the Sandisk Optimus GX 7100M is no different. Lower capacities don’t make sense for an upgrade when base models typically come with at least 512GB of storage. Larger capacities, 4TB or more, are difficult to achieve in such a small form factor. The 7100M only being available at 1TB and 2TB, therefore, makes sense. We will add that 4TB is possible with slightly longer M.2 2242 SSDs like the Corsair MP700 Micro and, also, 4TB for 2230 will be possible in the future. Furthermore, if devices were designed for double-sided drives, then all these limits would be effectively doubled. From the other side of things, rising memory and storage costs mean that base units might arrive with less storage, making smaller drives relevant again. It’s a push-pull situation.
At the time of review, the 1TB was going for $229.99 and the 2TB for $449.99. At 1TB, you could get the P310 for a little bit less, but otherwise, you will be giving up performance to save money. Considering the P310 is QLC-based, the 7100M isn’t too badly priced there. At 2TB, the price gap is more significant, as you can get slower alternatives for $50 to $150 less. Unfortunately, maximum performance at 2TB is the holy grail, so paying the premium could be worth it. Right now, it’s $50 or 12.5% over the last-generation WD Black SN770M, for instance, and on paper, that sounds reasonable for a drive that’s faster and more efficient.
Both capacities of the 7100M have the same peak performance level: up to 7,250 / 6,900 MB/s for sequential reads and writes and up to 1,000K / 1,300K random read and write IOPS. Both sets of numbers are excellent for a drive in this form factor, and the drive even exceeds what the Phison E27T-based Corsair MP600 Mini can achieve. This is top-tier performance for this segment and a full notch above the WD Black SN770M and effectively matches the 7100M’s forebear, the WD Black SN7100. While the Black SN7100 did not particularly stand out for us with its performance, its power efficiency is fantastic. That bodes well for the 7100M.
SanDisk has the drive pulling 4W or less under typical workloads, which puts the drive into a good spot for mobile devices. We test with a mixed workload, which can push a drive a little bit harder than this. Either way, this isn’t a lot of power for a full-fledged Gen 4 device – the drive’s 7,250 MB/s is near the limits of the interface – so we can expect good power efficiency.
Sandisk backs the drive with the standard 5-year, 600TB of writes per TB warranty. The drive supports the TCG Pyrite 2.01 specification and only has software encryption. This is perfectly normal for a drive of this type. The TBW is, however, higher with TLC versus QLC flash.
Sandisk Optimus GX 7100M Software and Accessories
Sandisk has you covered with its software. The Sandisk Desktop App, which works on Windows and macOS, is useful for general file transfer and password protection – software encryption, as well. The Sandisk Dashboard is Sandisk’s take on WD’s Dashboard, an SSD toolbox application with a wide range of features. An SSD toolbox like this gives you information on your system and drives, including SMART and health information. It lets you test and benchmark the drive. Importantly, this software also helps you update the firmware, if necessary, and use other features such as Game Mode. Sandisk also offers an Acronis True Image download, which is great for backing up files and your OS or for cloning drives.
Sandisk Optimus GX 7100M: A Closer Look
Tom's HardwareTom's Hardware
The 2TB Optimus GX 7100M is a single-sided drive, optimized for device compatibility. This does limit it to a single NAND flash package, which puts a cap at 2TB. This is because the most common dies widely available are 1Tb, or 128GB, apiece, and typically a single package – which has to stack the dies on top of each other, might have dummy dies for stability, and has to carefully maintain signal quality without exceeding height limitations – can only hit sixteen dies.
According to the specification sheet, this drive uses the M.2 2230-S3-M form factor. The M.2 format is easily recognizable as the way consumer SSDs are made these days, in contrast to the old 2.5” SATA drives. Other form factors meet the needs of the enterprise. 2230 tells us the length and width in millimeters. This is a common size for portable devices like the Steam Deck, the Asus ROG Ally, and the Lenovo Legion Go. The “M” part means it’s M-key, which we expect these days as NVMe drives using a full four lanes are common. Some drives can drop back to two lanes, like the Samsung 990 EVO and Samsung 990 EVO Plus, but are still capable of using four.
The “S3” is the part we’re looking for here, which tells us it’s single-sided rather than double-sided with a “D.” The number tells us the permitted height of the components. S1 allows for 1.2mm, S2 1.35mm, and S3 1.5mm. We would expect this drive to be S3 since it needs to pack in sixteen dies. The nominal PCB thickness for M.2 is 0.8mm, so this puts the drive at ~2.3mm, and the datasheet lists 2.38mm. This isn’t too interesting on its own, but it could be useful if you know the exact limitations of your device or need to make other measurements, such as for custom cooling. Some devices can take double-sided devices, which, as you can imagine, have similar height thresholds but with components on both sides.
One other interesting thing is the rated power: 3.3V at 1.8A puts the peak power around 6W. This is well higher than the specification sheet, which, again, is for average and also with read and write separately rather than mixed, as well as what’s listed by SMART and in our testing. We reckon this drive will always be below 5W, which normally would ensure there won’t be any heat issues. For M.2 2280, that’s broadly true, but heat is always an issue for 2230.
Tom's HardwareTom's HardwareTom's Hardware
In addition to the sole NAND flash package, the drive also has a DRAM-less SSD controller and power management circuitry. The controller is proprietary Sandisk technology, listed as the A101-000171-A1. Similar to the WD Black SN7100's A101-000172-A1, which is a four-channel controller that can take fast enough flash to saturate PCIe 4.0. We would expect the drives to share the same flash, too, which would be Sandisk’s 218-Layer TLC. BiCS8 flash, whether TLC or QLC, has proven to have fantastic random read latency and also excellent power efficiency. This makes it great for the M.2 2230 segment.
The 7100M is still DRAM-less, as it can be difficult to make a DRAM package work in this form factor. In the past, it was not uncommon to see DRAM at least in M.2 2242, but modern host memory buffer (HMB) solutions are quite good. A quick look at the random 4KB results for this drive will dispel any illusions that you need DRAM to make a drive feel fast. In fact, it’s very unlikely DRAM would ever make a difference in the type of device this drive is made for, although there are always exceptions. Yes, there are some odd drives that have DRAM as part of the controller package – SK hynix’s BC711 comes to mind –, but these are rare and relegated to the Gen 3 era. An OEM Gen 3 drive is perfectly enough for a Steam Deck, but we’re in the business of gauging modern retail options.
The older Black SN770M, which is a retail version of the OEM SN740 – an extremely popular drive when the Steam Deck was still young – and a shortened version of the Black SN770, struggled with power efficiency. At least, in comparison to some of the newer 2230 drives on the block. With that problem out of the way, thanks to more efficient flash, the 7100M might very well be the best drive of its type available. We certainly think so, but knowing the pedigree of the hardware can help explain why this is.
The Sandisk Optimus GX 7100M is slated to be the top for M.2 2230 SSDs, so we are putting it up against our best drives. These include theCrucial P310, which, despite being QLC-based, is the fastest all-around 2230 drive up to this point, and theCorsair MP600 Mini with the Phison E27T. The Phison E27T controller, when paired with TLC flash, as is the case with the Corsair drive, is about as fast as you can get, but more importantly, it has the advantages of TLC. This means more consistent performance and better endurance. The Optimus GX 7100M, also with TLC flash, is therefore the ultimate challenger.
For other hardware, we have theKingston NV3 that uses a comparable SMI controller. We have an SMI controller in theLexar Play, too, although at a lower speed. The 7100M’s predecessor, theWD Black SN770M, is also in play. This drive and its OEM counterpart became popular picks after the Steam Deck came out, offering, at the time, the best performance possible at the cost of higher power consumption. Alternatives here generally use the Phison E21T controller with various TLC and QLC flash choices. These include theSilicon Power UD90, theSabrent Rocket Q4, and the Teamgroup MP44S.
Trace Testing — 3DMark Storage Benchmark
Built for gamers, 3DMark’s Storage Benchmark focuses on real-world gaming performance. Each round in this benchmark stresses storage based on gaming activities, including loading games, saving progress, installing game files, and recording gameplay video streams. Future gaming benchmarks will be DirectStorage-inclusive, and an evaluation for future-proofing is included where applicable.
Tom's HardwareTom's HardwareTom's Hardware
If you’re buying an M.2 2230 SSD, you’re probably buying it for gaming. Yes, there are productivity machines with small form factor SSDs, and you could buy this drive and use it with an extender for a random system, but gaming is the one place it has to do well. Frankly, we’re impressed with how well the 7100M does here. It’s second only to the P310 and is first among TLC-based drives. Beating the TLC-equipped, E27T-based MP600 Mini is an accomplishment. This drive will be very responsive for gaming, and we’d even put it above the P310 for that, in fact. This is because the P310 is using QLC flash – with a fuller drive, with a lifetime of transfers and wear, it should suffer more, meaning you’d pick the 7100M for peace of mind. At the very least, it’s a deciding point if the prices are close.
As a side note, this drive is supported by the Sandisk Dashboard and, as such, has the Game Mode feature. This mode works by disabling the drive’s idle power states, improving responsiveness. This can slightly improve game loading times. The Dashboard is designed for Windows.
Trace Testing — PCMark 10 Storage Benchmark
PCMark 10 is an industry standard trace-based benchmark that uses a wide-ranging set of real-world traces from popular applications and everyday tasks to measure the performance of storage devices. The results are particularly useful when analyzing drives for their use as primary/boot storage devices and in work environments.
Tom's HardwareTom's HardwareTom's Hardware
The 7100M proves to be great at productivity, too, more or less tied for first in PCMark 10 with the P310. Our QLC caveat applies again: all else being equal, you’d probably pick the TLC 7100M over the P310. We want to emphasize that there are many good DRAM-less drives that can get near this performance level, but you don’t see that hardware in this form factor. For example, we don’t see the Maxio MAP1602 controller here, for a variety of reasons. That controller does tend to run hot, for one thing, and that’s always a looming concern for this form factor. We also don’t see much from SMI, and when we do, it’s usually for budget drives. This reduces the amount of direct resistance to the 7100M.
Phison exists, but the E21T and controllers of that class were and remain much more present in this form factor. That’s partly because the M.2 2230 form factor took off around the same time that such drive technology came out, and now we have a very uncomfortable memory market. Also, the Steam Deck is PCIe 3.0, so you only need so much performance for the most popular destination device. Even with 4.0 devices, a 5 GB/s drive is plenty of performance for a portable system. That means that a drive like the 7100M has less direct competition than you might expect if we’re talking about performance. It’s nearly peerless, in fact. If that’s what you want, then this drive should be at the very top of your list.
Steam Deck Testing — Gaming, KDiskMark, and Temperature
The Steam Deck is not the only portable gaming system in town, but it was the first and most popular to take M.2 2230 SSDs. While some systems have moved on to fit 2280-length drives, 2230 remains popular for many systems, and such drives will work fine in longer slots with the proper standoff or extender. The Deck operates in PCIe 3.0 mode for its SSD, limiting maximum bandwidth, but that has less of an impact on responsiveness/latency, and the Deck is still useful for gauging drive temperature and power efficiency.
Our current testing for the Deck involves analyzing game load times for some popular games. This is probably the most important metric for gamers, but the difference between one SSD and another can be small. We also use KDiskMark, a CrystalDiskMark-like substitute that uses the flexible I/O (FIO) tester instead of diskspd for its underlying benchmarks. We also check the drive’s maximum temperature during this test.
The tests in this section are run under the stock Arch-based SteamOS Linux platform, but our other tests are conducted as per our normal reviews, using Windows. Many portable gaming systems today use or can use Windows with multi-boot as an option. This testing section is instead designed to give an idea of Linux performance, which does involve the use of Proton.
The 7100M does well in all of this testing and runs relatively cool, too. We specifically want to point out its excellent random read performance at QD1, a metric that most readily correlates with responsiveness or “feel.” The P310 pulls away at a higher queue depth, but this is mostly not relevant to what this drive needs to do. We’d say the 7100M’s biggest weak point is the QD1 sequential read speed, merely good but significantly below the P310’s. Many apps and games have low QD sequential reads for loading, and it’s possible the P310 will be slightly quicker for some titles. The magnitude of this, on average, across apps and games will likely be tiny, to say the least, and further, we think that a fuller and realistically worn drive might favor the TLC-based 7100M in the long term. Then again, you probably won’t be fully wearing out any drive in a portable gaming system. We’d probably focus more on heat and power draw, which we address further below.
We do want to point out that QD1 sequential read performance is excellent in our CrystalDiskMark test below. KDiskMark is running on Linux and is built on FIO, which is a different I/O stack. Additionally, on the Deck, we’re testing drives only at PCIe 3.0 speeds. Furthermore, in some cases, weak CPUs – and this applies to many APUs – as well as different platforms, can impact storage performance results. If your portable device is running on something more modern with Windows and PCIe 4.0, it’s quite possible your results will align more with CDM.
Transfer Rates — DiskBench
We use the DiskBench storage benchmarking tool to test file transfer performance with a custom 50GB dataset. We write 31,227 files of various types, such as pictures, PDFs, and videos to the test drive, then make a copy of that data to a new folder, and follow up with a reading test of a newly-written 6.5GB zip file. This is a real-world type workload that fits into the cache of most drives.
Tom's HardwareTom's HardwareTom's Hardware
The 7100M delivers the highest copy rate in DiskBench, along with the highest read transfer rate. In a portable device, such as one that would take a primary M.2 2230 drive, you often don’t have a lot of fast transfer sources. You might have only a 10Gbps external drive, a relatively slow microSD card, and so forth. Copying on the same drive still occurs with updates and other procedures, and you are essentially relying on a single drive to manage most things on the system. For this reason, the DiskBench results are still useful for gauging how well a drive can manage mixed workloads. The 7100M handles that like a champ, and the high read performance – considering you do a lot of reads – is also a bonus.
The only anomaly here is the write speed, which was also a bit low in our previous Steam Deck test section. Write performance can be misleading for many reasons. Most pertinently, modern drives use pSLC caching, which can “hide” the true performance of the native flash. This can mean performance is not always consistent. Manufacturers can optimize the drive firmware with this in mind, making trade-offs such as varying the cache size to improve sustained performance. Drives ultimately have to move data over from the cache to the native flash, so test results don’t always align with expectations. To get a fuller idea of write performance, you should check our Write Saturation section.
Synthetic Testing — ATTO / CrystalDiskMark
ATTO and CrystalDiskMark (CDM) are free and easy-to-use storage benchmarking tools that SSD vendors commonly use to assign performance specifications to their products. Both of these tools give us insight into how each device handles different file sizes and at different queue depths for both sequential and random workloads.
The first signs of weakness on this drive appear in ATTO, but things are not as bad as they first appear. We’re talking about read performance, and when looking at our logarithmic chart, the jumps up and down don’t seem as bad. While throttling could affect this test, generally, that’s not the case. It helps that we see the same pattern with the WD Black SN7100, as we can rule out any randomness.
However, we don’t see it with the WD Blue SN5100, which uses BiCS8 QLC and a comparable controller, so this is probably a feature of BiCS8 TLC. We also don’t see it on the WD Black SN8100 or Corsair MP700 Pro XT, drives with that flash but controllers from SMI and Phison, respectively, so it’s not the flash on its own, either. Given the drops are at 64KiB and 256KiB – with 16KiB pages, this is with 4-way and 16-way interleaving, which aligns both with the flash channel count and the four-plane count dies – it’s likely an artifact of how the proprietary controller manages the reads. Sandisk has some interesting optimization going on, which you can see most clearly with random reads and power efficiency, so we don’t want to jump to conclusions, especially as long as real-world performance remains strong.
Thankfully, it does. The 7100M has incredibly low 4KB random read latency at QD1 in CDM, blowing away the rest of the 2230 drives. As we pointed out above, the competition here is more limited in comparison to full-length drives, which helps the 7100M stand out even more. In many cases, you could look only at this result and be convinced that this is the drive to get. However, as we’ve stated in the past, a good rule of thumb is ~45µs if you want a top-notch experience, and other drives hit that. The 7100M just takes it to a new level.
Sequential read performance at QD1 is also very important; in fact, it is sometimes overlooked with regard to game and app load times. It often deserves to be weighted alongside random 4KB. Luckily, the 7100M is tops here, too. WD and Sandisk have this mastered, as the SN770M is a monster as well. Given that the 7100M can push even more bandwidth with efficient flash, just chef’s kiss.
Sustained Write Performance and Cache Recovery
Official write specifications are only part of the performance picture. Most SSDs implement a write cache, which is a fast area of pseudo-SLC (single-bit) programmed flash that absorbs incoming data. Sustained write speeds can suffer tremendously once the workload spills outside of the cache and into the "native" TLC (three-bit) or QLC (four-bit) flash. Performance can suffer even more if the drive is forced to fold, the process of migrating data out of the cache in order to free up space for further incoming data.
We use Iometer to hammer the SSD with sequential writes for 15 minutes to measure both the size of the write cache and performance after the cache is saturated. We also monitor cache recovery via multiple idle rounds. This process shows the performance of the drive in various states including the steady state write performance.
Tom's HardwareTom's HardwareTom's Hardware
Modern drives tend to write in three states: the pSLC cache, direct to the native flash, and in a folding mode. The first mode is temporary and fast, converting native flash into single-bit mode to trade capacity for speed. When space gets tight, the drive can choose to write straight to the flash. This is slower and can be worse for endurance in some cases. When space is completely exhausted, the drive is forced to wait for data to go through the pSLC cache and be “folded” over to the native flash, is far slower and decreases drive consistency and responsiveness. Most of the time, you want to be in the cache, especially with an M.2 2230 drive, but it’s worth seeing how the drive might behave if it’s left in a fuller state after sustaining writes.
How the pSLC cache is handled varies from drive to drive. A larger cache can handle larger bursts of traffic, but this can leave the drive more vulnerable in some cases. A smaller cache can result in more consistent drive performance. There are also two types of pSLC cache, static and dynamic, with different characteristics. Generally speaking, the static portion is always available, while the dynamic portion is altered with the amount of free space. Proprietary solutions such as Samsung’s TurboWrite and WD’s or Sandisk’s nCache – with nCache 4.0 on this drive – use both types in tandem.
WD’s and Sandisk’s most recent drives have opted for larger caches. This is also true for Samsung, which, with the Samsung 990, has significantly increased the size of the cache. In the 7100M’s case, the cache takes up almost the entire drive. The drive wrote at over 6.4 GB/s for 110 seconds, implying a ~708GB cache. With three bits in TLC needed per pSLC bit, this is quite large for a 2TB drive, although there is a little free space, which helps keep the drive from flatlining completely. Instead, the drive is able to maintain a middle mode around 2.9 GB/s for a small amount of time, which is, honestly, quite fast for such a mode. In most cases, this would be an adequate cushion.
After that, the drive oscillates when hitting the folding mode. Performance is much less consistent as space is periodically freed. We see an actual peak of around 1,450 MB/s here, which is about half of that 2.9 GB/s. This is a common ratio because when you’re folding, you’re essentially writing twice. However, the controller is juggling many things as it is attempting to remain responsive to incoming I/O while moving data in the background. Therefore, performance dips further with a bottom closer to 500 MB/s or so. Over time, this gives us an average of 894 MB/s, which isn’t too bad. By all standards, it’s better than any QLC-based drive and is respectable for a TLC drive with such a large cache.
Power Consumption and Temperature
We use the Quarch HD Programmable Power Module to gain a deeper understanding of power characteristics. Idle power consumption is an important aspect to consider, especially if you're looking for a laptop upgrade, as even the best ultrabooks can have mediocre stock storage in terms of capacity and performance. Desktops are often more performance-oriented with less support for power-saving features, so we show the worst-case scenario for idle.
Some SSDs can consume watts of power at idle while better-suited ones sip just milliwatts. Average workload power consumption and max consumption are two other aspects of power consumption, but performance-per-watt, or efficiency, is more important. A drive might consume more power during any given workload, but accomplishing a task faster allows the drive to drop into an idle state more quickly, ultimately saving energy.
For temperature recording, we currently poll the drive’s primary composite sensor during testing with a ~22°C ambient. Our testing is rigorous enough to heat the drive to a realistic ceiling temperature, but real-world temperatures will vary due to the environment and workload factors.
The 7100M does not disappoint in power efficiency. It’s the most power-efficient drive on this list and the most power-efficient M.2 2230 SSD that we’ve tested. We feel like anything over about 500 MB/s per watt is good enough for this segment, but getting above that into the P310 or NV3 range is better. It’s hard to argue with this result.
Drives can have multiple sensors for different things. Temperatures can be reported for the flash memory, the DRAM if present, the PMIC, and the controller. Typically, these values are not super accurate and certainly will be different from directly measured temperatures, as often they are a composite. This essentially means the drive reports a general temperature measured against a range for throttling.
Measured temperatures from the 7100M’s sensors came in at 73°C, 76°C, and 85°C for peak readings. The drive is rated to throttle at 90°C with a critical temperature of 94°C. Generally, we like to have at least 10°C of headroom and preferably twice that. So, the numbers here do give us pause, but they can be explained. If we compare the P310, for example, we have another very efficient drive that, in our testing, got within 5 degrees of throttling. The reason is simple: this short form factor has all the hardware pressed together. It’s hard to get around that fact, and it’s very common for 2230 drives to throttle or overheat in portable devices, especially when traveling in warmer climates. You usually have little to no cooling right next to a maxed-out APU, after all.
Another consideration is the workload. You’re unlikely to have sustained writes of the type we’re doing. If you’re on a Steam Deck or an older device, you’re also going to be running in PCIe 3.0 mode. Drives will run much cooler in that mode or with everyday workloads. To add to that, these temperatures don’t reflect actual internal ones or the real limits of the hardware. You should not assume that high temps like this mean the drive won’t have a long lifespan, especially since your host device will likely spend most of its time sleeping.
That said, we do recommend you treat your drive well. If it is at all possible to improve cooling – and this could be a simple matter of adding some thermal interface material or a low-profile heatsink – then you should consider it. Avoid breaking warranties, of course. A good example of what we’re talking about is the Apple MacBook Neo. The main chip on it runs notoriously hot, and DIYers have shown that even adding just some thermal padding can significantly improve performance. The chip still throttles, though. This is the reality of portable devices like this, and thankfully, your SSD won’t be running full blast like an APU any time soon. So we don’t think this is a major drawback of the 7100M – it’s just difficult to escape – but you should be aware that top-tier Gen 4 performance comes at a cost.
We use an Alder Lake platform with most background applications, such as indexing, Windows updates, and anti-virus, disabled in the OS to reduce run-to-run variability. Each SSD is prefilled to 50% capacity and tested as a secondary device. Unless noted, we use active cooling for all SSDs.
Sandisk Optimus GX 7100M Bottom Line
The Sandisk Optimus GX 7100M is, in a word, fantastic. Anyone who loved the WD Black SN7100 as a proper successor to the WD Black SN770, especially for its class-leading random read performance and power efficiency, can now get that in M.2 2230. The Black SN7100 has been the best SSD for laptops, and now smaller portable devices can enjoy new levels of storage comfort, too.
The 7100M doesn’t disappoint with high levels of performance across-the-board and excellent power efficiency. It’s not always the fastest, but it’s very fast where it matters and doesn’t have the power consumption issue of the previous WD Black SN770M. Even though these drives usually end up on a Linux machine such as the Steam Deck with SteamOS, Sandisk’s excellent Windows software suite is a cherry on top if you’re working with that OS, are multi-booting, or need to work with the drive on your main Windows PC. The drive is also great for enclosures, particularly ones for M.2 2230 drives, and you can extend this drive with an M.2 extender accessory for other slots. It’s just a solid product, no matter what.
(Image credit: Tom's Hardware)
The drive lacks a full capacity range of SKUs, but we can’t hold that against it. Higher capacities cannot be achieved without going double-sided or up to M.2 2242. Lower capacities have generally been less desirable, and performance would be lower, too. It wouldn’t be the first time a new 2230 model was limited to 1TB, but Sandisk is going for 2TB out of the gate. Sandisk opted for the two most popular capacities, and performance is stellar for both. Power consumption is also low for both, which is useful for the battery-limited target devices for the drive. It’s really hard to find fault here.
Although it’s not easy to find downsides to this drive, we do feel there are enough drawbacks to prevent it from getting a perfect score. We feel the pricing isn’t too far out there given the current market, and that aside, we’re then looking at performance and cooling. Performance is not always consistent across our tests, and while Sandisk’s pSLC optimization makes sense within the greater product stack, they could have taken a cue from Phison and been more conservative with it. There are people who will want to use this drive in fast enclosures, and having more consistent, sustained writes could help them. But this is a nitpick.
Of more concern is the heat output of the drive, which, to be fair, is also not really Sandisk’s fault. This level of performance in a tight package is going to put out some heat. Because the drive has to fit in a range of devices, Sandisk can’t really throw on a heatsink or anything like that. The drive will be fine in any Gen 3 device and, hopefully, any properly designed Gen 4 device. Alternative drives do not necessarily offer any advantage over the 7100M here, either. Nevertheless, we’ve seen from newer controller designs like the Phison E31T that you could probably do better in this form factor. Sandisk is using existing technology from its stack, and that makes the most financial sense, but that also leaves in our mind the knowledge that a better product could exist.
We’d say that’s quite complimentary to Sandisk, considering the 7100M is the best M.2 2230 drive on the market. If you’re looking for the best 2230 drive, this is it. Your experience is going to be fantastic in every way – fast load times, good power consumption levels, and software support with True Image and a respected toolbox if you need it. You will pay a premium for it, but particularly for an enthusiast Gen 4 device, this is well worth it. On the other hand, your device might come with a fast, capacious drive, so you wouldn’t be looking at the 7100M, anyway. If you’re on the budget end of things, you can save money here, too. Any of the other 2230 drives on the list will probably be sufficient in that case. The 7100M is an investment, but a sound one, and we can highly recommend it.
Apple Intelligence files can occupy several gigabytes of Mac storage because locally downloaded models power text generation, summaries, image creation, Siri requests, and other on-device features. Removing these files can recover valuable space when Apple Intelligence is no longer needed.
Apple lists 7GB of available device storage among the requirements for Apple Intelligence, but the amount displayed on a Mac can be higher. Additional languages, image-generation resources, updated models, and temporary assets can increase the total over time.
The files are managed by macOS and do not appear as ordinary documents that can be moved to the Trash. Apple provides a supported removal method through System Settings: turning off Apple Intelligence causes macOS to remove the downloaded on-device models.
This also disables features that depend on Apple Intelligence. Writing Tools, summaries, Image Playground, Genmoji, intelligent Shortcuts actions, and Apple Intelligence functions inside Siri may become unavailable. Regular Mac applications and the rest of macOS continue working normally.
Check Apple Intelligence Files on Your Mac
Recording the available storage before removing the files makes it easier to confirm how much space macOS recovered afterward.
To see the current storage allocation:
Apple menu > System Settings > General > Storage
Allow the Storage page to finish calculating its categories. The process may take a moment when the Mac contains many applications, local files, connected volumes, or several user accounts.
Apple Intelligence may appear as a separate item within the macOS storage category. Depending on the installed macOS version, some related assets may instead be counted under macOS or System Data.
Note the amount of available storage displayed near the storage graph. Comparing the total free space before and after the procedure is usually more reliable than watching one category because macOS can reclassify system-managed files while deleting them.
To inspect the complete internal storage container:
Apple menu > System Settings > General > Storage > All Volumes
This view is useful when the internal drive contains several APFS volumes sharing the same physical storage. The available capacity belongs to the shared container rather than remaining permanently assigned to one volume.
The storage used by Apple Intelligence is different from the memory, or RAM, used while features are running. Closing applications may reduce RAM consumption, but it does not delete the models stored on the internal SSD.
Image Credit: AppleMagazine
Remove Local Apple Intelligence Files
Apple Intelligence is available on compatible Macs with Apple silicon. Intel-based Macs do not support the complete Apple Intelligence system and should not contain the same downloadable model collection.
To turn off Apple Intelligence and request the removal of its on-device models:
Apple menu > System Settings > Apple Intelligence & Siri > Turn off Apple Intelligence > Turn Off Apple Intelligence
The second Turn Off Apple Intelligence command confirms the change. The exact appearance may vary between macOS versions, with the first control presented as either a switch or a button.
Apple says that turning off Apple Intelligence removes the on-device models. There is no separate model manager, Delete Models button, or supported Finder location from which users must remove the files manually.
Keep the Mac connected to power while macOS completes its background storage work. The Apple Intelligence setting changes immediately, but the Storage page may not display the recovered capacity at once.
macOS manages these models through its system asset service. The operating system must identify the associated packages, release them, and recalculate the storage categories. The process can therefore continue after the Apple Intelligence switch has already moved to the off position.
Turning off only individual features does not remove the complete model collection. Disabling notification summaries, Writing Tools, ChatGPT access, or Siri suggestions leaves Apple Intelligence itself active.
A Screen Time restriction also serves a different purpose. It can prevent access to image generation, Writing Tools, and other functions without turning off the underlying intelligence system. Use the Apple Intelligence control inside Apple Intelligence & Siri when the objective is recovering storage.
Confirm That the Space Was Recovered
After macOS has had time to process the removal, return to the Storage page.
To check the available capacity again:
Apple menu > System Settings > General > Storage
Wait for the storage graph and categories to finish updating. Compare the new amount of available space with the figure recorded before Apple Intelligence was turned off.
The Apple Intelligence entry may disappear completely, display a smaller amount, or become part of an adjusted macOS or System Data category. The increase in total available storage provides the better indication that the local models were removed.
If the figures have not changed, restart the Mac to refresh its system services and storage calculation.
To restart macOS:
Apple menu > Restart > Restart
Sign back in, allow the Mac to remain idle for a while, and open the Storage page again.
Apple menu > System Settings > General > Storage
Restarting does not delete the models by itself. Apple Intelligence must remain disabled while macOS completes the removal.
Emptying the Trash is not part of this procedure because macOS does not place Apple Intelligence models there. The Trash affects only files that a user or application has already marked for deletion.
Image Credit: Apple Inc.
What to Do When the Files Remain
First, verify that the complete Apple Intelligence system is off rather than one related feature.
To confirm its status:
Apple menu > System Settings > Apple Intelligence & Siri > Apple Intelligence
The control should display Apple Intelligence as disabled. If macOS presents another confirmation request, complete it and leave the feature off.
Storage information can take time to settle because macOS also manages caches, local snapshots, temporary update packages, and purgeable files. These categories can change while the Mac is idle, making an immediate before-and-after comparison misleading.
Installing the latest stable macOS update can correct storage reporting or asset-management problems.
To check for an available update:
Apple menu > System Settings > General > Software Update
Save current work before installing an update. The Mac may need to restart, and the installation temporarily requires additional free storage.
Beta versions of macOS require extra caution. Development releases may download experimental models, retain previous model revisions, or temporarily change the Apple Intelligence controls. A procedure confirmed for the public version of macOS may not produce the same storage behavior in a beta.
Avoid following online instructions that require starting in macOS Recovery, disabling System Integrity Protection, mounting protected volumes, and deleting folders with names referring to MobileAsset or generative models.
System Integrity Protection prevents applications and administrator accounts from modifying protected parts of macOS. Disabling it weakens that protection and creates the possibility of deleting the wrong asset, leaving macOS with an incomplete model installation, or causing the system database to disagree with the files present on the drive.
A storage utility can help identify how much space system files occupy, but it should not require disabling macOS security to remove Apple Intelligence. If the documented switch leaves a large allocation after a restart and sufficient processing time, Apple Support can investigate the asset database without exposing the Mac to an unsupported system modification.
Turning Apple Intelligence on again reverses the storage saving.
To restore its features:
Apple menu > System Settings > Apple Intelligence & Siri > Turn On Apple Intelligence
The Mac will download the required local models again. Apple recommends leaving the device connected to Wi-Fi and power while the model download completes.
It’s aimed at the radios inside modern inverters, not the power electronics. And it lands on a market where US factories are on track to supply just 40% of combined solar and battery demand next year, according to testing firm Intertek CEA.
SSD prices in general remain considerably higher than a year ago. Still, this discount on Samsung's 9100 Pro 2TB SSD is a welcome sight, as Samsung's fastest PCIe Gen 5.0 drive returns to the lower pricing that we witnessed during the most recent Amazon Prime Day sales event at the end of last month. You can currently grab the 2TB Samsung 9100 Pro for $399.99 at Amazon, a discount of 41% compared to its list price. That's only $10 more than Samsung's excellent 2TB 990 Pro SSD at $389.99, and $30 more than Samsung's recently released 2TB 990 at $369.99, which are both previous-generation PCIe 4.0 SSDs with half of the available bandwidth speeds.
Samsung's 9100 Pro SSD boasts sequential read speeds of up to 14,700MB/s and write speeds of 13,400MB/s thanks to the available PCIe 5.0 bandwidth, making it one of the fastest drives on the market, perfect for heavy professional application workloads, and of course top-end gaming PCs.
By contrast, the 990 Pro offers about half the read and write speeds of this drive at around 7,450/6,900MB/s, with the recently released Samsung 990 offering up to 7,250/6,450 MB/s, but switching from TLC to QLC NAND. These drives pretty much max out the PCIe Gen 4 bandwidth, with the new Samsung 990 being marketed as a budget-oriented SSD, but in reality and most importantly, in terms of pricing, the difference between the Samsung 990 and the much faster 9100 Pro is just $30.
The 2TB 9100 Pro comes with a 236-Layer Samsung TLC (V8) flash memory and is rated for sequential read and write speeds of 14,700 MB/s and 13,400 MB/s, respectively. One of the fastest PCIe Gen 5 drives available. View Deal
We've reviewed Samsung's 9100 Pro and found this impressive Gen 5 drive to be one of the fastest SSDs available to buy. During benchmark testing, the Samsung drive placed near the very top of the charts. In our PCMark 10 Storage tests. the 9100 scored higher than any other drive we've tested.
Tom's HardwareTom's HardwareTom's Hardware
However, if your motherboard doesn't support PCIe Gen 5, or you only have a single Gen 5 M.2 slot on your mobo and need to populate any other spare M.2 slots with PCIe Gen 4 SSDs, then the Samsung 990 Pro is the best shout.
Upgrade the storage in your PC, laptop, or PS5 with this wicked-fast 2TB Samsung 990 Pro PCIe 4.0 M.2 SSD. The 990 Pro sports read and write speeds of around 7,450/6,900MB/s respectively. View Deal
Or save a further $20 and opt for Samsung's latest SSD, the 2TB 990. This PCIe Gen 4 drive opts for QLC NAND, but still has fast access speeds. The drive can reach 7,250/6,450MB/s for sequential reads and writes and up to 850K/1,200K random read and write IOPS.
The 2TB 990 is a PCIe Gen 4 SSD able to reach 7,250/6,450MB/s for sequential reads and writes and up to 850K/1,200K random read and write IOPS.View Deal
RAM and SSDs are some of the toughest PC components to get your hands on at the moment at prices that won't give your bank account an aneurysm, so we take any discounts we can. Especially if it helps us build or upgrade our beloved PCs for slightly less. There's currently no end in sight for memory and NAND prices to return to more normalized values until manufacturers can ramp up production, and AI hyperscalers stop sweeping up all the demand. So definitely give these Samsung SSD deals a look if you're on the hunt for an SSD upgrade.
Price comparison from over 24,000 stores worldwide
Product
Price
Price comparison from Backmarket
OWC’s 80Gbps 4M2 Ultra is a four-slot RAID enclosure that lets you build your own high-capacity, super-fast external storage using NVMe SSDs.
Depending on the RAID mode you use, you can saturate the 80Gbps Thunderbolt 5/USB4 bus to the tune of 7GBps sequential transfers. You can also safeguard your data with mirroring or parity, which a single external SSD enclosure won’t allow.
What are the OWC 4M2 Ultra’s features?
The 4M2 Ultra is a black, mostly aluminum box measuring around 4.75-inches tall, 4.5.inches deep, by 2.35-inches wide. Unlike the 40Gbps 4M2, the sides are finned to create more heat-shedding surface area. Nice. On the back are two Thunderbolt 5 ports (one marked as the computer port), a Kensington lock port, and the AC adapter jack…
You didn’t think you could run four SSDs on bus power alone, did you? Well, being curious and considering that Thunderbolt 5 is required to deliver 140 watts (240 watts optionally) I pulled the power jack with the 4M2 Ultra attached to my M4 Max Studio. No blue power light. Sigh.
The rear of the 4M2 Ultra with the upstream and downstream Thunderbolt 5 ports, the Kensington lock port and the AC adapter jack.
I was a bit surprised to see the 4M2 Ultra open like a flower when I removed the screw-down backplate. The backplate holds the two side plates (keyed for reattachment) in place, so both fell to the side, revealing two 2280/2242 M.2 slots under each.
Thermal strips are pre-attached to the side plates, which is thoughtful, though mine didn’t have any protection on them. Before I realized that, I’d minimally damaged one by stacking one side plate on the other. Easily repairable, so no big deal.
The 4M2 Ultra’s dual PC board, chips and fan are sandwiched between the two dual-drive bays. The front of the 4M2 Ultra is perforated to allow air flow through the unit to the vents on back.
You can hear the fan when it kicks in. It’s not loud, but if such things bug you, you’ve been informed. I find the sound reassuring in that the 4M2 Ultra isn’t allowing your SSDs to fry.
All four major pieces of the 4M2 Ultra: two sides, the main body and the backplate.
The Intel JHL9480 (Barlow Ridge) controller allocates each of the 4M2 Ultra’s M.2 slots a single PCIe 4.0 lane, which amounts to around 2GBps of bandwidth per slot. Hence, while you could run the four SSDs singly, you’ll only get 80Gbps (or 40Gbps) performance with all four drives combined in RAID 0 (fastest) or RAID 10 (next fastest).
To operate the Express 4M2 Ultra in RAID, you need software. OWC provides a license for its handy cross-platform SoftRAID, though the inlcuded Pro license expires three years from the date of purchase. However, the core functions (operation and rebuilding arrays) remain eternally functional.
OWC’s SoftRAID array creation page.
If expiring software makes you nervous, there’s always macOS RAID or Windows Storage Spaces. Sadly, Windows Storage Spaces is pathetically slow, but macOS RAID 0 was competitive with SoftRAID
The 4M2 Ultra is warrantied for two years, however, given the quality of the construction it should last well beyond that.
How fast is the 4M2 Ultra?
When running four SSDs in RAID 0, the 80Gbps 4M2 Ultra is a very fast reader, up to 7GBps (Windows). It’s a considerably slower writing at a little over 2GBps according to most of our tests.
The 4M2 Ultra is also significantly faster in every RAID mode than the older 40Gbps 4M2 — hardly surprising given twice the older unit’s 40Gbps bandwidth. Note that all RAID tests were done while using OWC’s SoftRAID in RAID 0.
AmorphousDiskMark had the 4M2 Ultra at 6.35GBps reading, and 2.35GBps writing.
AmorphousDiskMark had the 4M2 Ultra at 6.35GBps reading, and 2.35GBps writing. This is in striped, RAID 0.
Disk Speed Test from Blackmagicdesign wasn’t quite as giddy as AmorphousDiskMark, and for some reason, likely a much smaller data set, showed 5GBps writing and only 2GBps reading.
For some reason Disk Speed Test wasn’t in alignment with either AmorphousDiskMark or ATTO when it came to write speeds.
I also ran the 4M2 Ultra through PCWorld’s battery of tests for comparison purposes. However, the other drives shown: the Satechi DotDisk, TerraMaster D1 SSD Pro, and OWC’s own 1M2 are 80Gbps single drive enclosures, which makes these comparisons a tad unfair. But the charts do show what you stand to gain or lose by going the RAID route.
The 4M2 Ultra did well in some CrystalDiskMark 8 (the code base for AmorphousDiskMark) tests, while in others, not so much. And with four SSDs to stripe writes across, the 4M2 Ultra’s write performance is a tad disappointing.
Though it’s very fast overall, with four SSDs to stripe writes across, we were expecting better write numbers from the 4M2 Ultra..
The 4M2 Ultra lagged a bit in CrystalDiskMark 8’s 4K tests, but it’s still fast in the grand scheme of external storage.
The 4M2 Ultra lagged a bit in CrystalDiskMark 8’s 4K tests, but it’s still fast in the grand scheme of external storage.
In PCWorld’s real life 48GB transfers, the 4M2 Ultra was quite close to the competition, and even tied for first in one test.
In PCWorld’s real life 48GB transfers, the 4M2 Ultra was quite close to the competition, and even tied for first in one test.
PCWorld’s 450GB write test proved the 4M2 Ultra to be a very fast solution when transferring very large files using Windows Explorer, but didn’t perk up, as is usually the case, with the fantastic FastCopy utility.
PCWorld’s 450GB write test proved the 4M2 Ultra to be a very fast solution when transferring very large files using Windows Explorer, but didn’t perk up as is usually the case with the FastCopy utility.
All told, the 4M2 Ultra is fast, and a great improvement over the older 40Gbps 4M2. However, it’s not as fast as single enclosures, so its most salient strength is combining smaller SSDs into a single large volume, up to 32TB with 8TB SSDs.
Note that while testing, it was discovered that Phison E26 controllers apparently require more power than my M4 Max Studio can provide under heavy loads at 80Gbps (10Gbps and 40Gbps are fine). Using these in the 4M2 Ultra was a rocky experience–they would disconnect under load. This did not occur with the 4M2 Ultra on PCWorld’s Wintel test beds. If you’re a Wintel user who has E26 SSDs, you’re safe. Have an 80Gbps Mac? Avoid them.
Should I buy the 4M2 Ultra?
If you want fast, super vast external storage, the 80Gbps 4M2 is a great way to create speedy large volumes from smaller SSDs. Just avoid E26-based SSDs.
Tesla has signed a long-term deal to buy 90% of the output of Project Sterling, a big solar and battery plant going up in Arizona.
The project pairs 509 MW of solar with a 360 MW battery, and it’s being built by ContourGlobal, the power producer owned by private equity firm KKR. It’s expected online in 2028.
One task awaiting new energy secretary Miatta Fahnbulleh is devising a plan to avoid a crisis by the end of the decade
Welcome to the energy secretary job, Miatta Fahnbulleh. You have a politically tricky decision to make on whether to approve production at the Jackdaw gasfield and the Rosebank oilfield. But here’s another one that can’t wait much longer: what is the broader plan to ensure Britain avoids a gas supply crisis in 2030?
By way of reminder, one of the more alarming reports published by the energy department under Ed Miliband was the one that warned of “an emerging risk” to gas supplies at the turn of the decade if an important piece of kit – an import terminal, say, or the critical 725-mile Langeled pipeline from Norway – were to be out of the action during a severe cold snap.
In macOS 28 and later, the Mac OS Extended file system format will be supported only for volumes (disks and other storage devices) that aren’t encrypted. For future macOS compatibility, either decrypt or reformat any encrypted Mac OS Extended volumes.
I think Apple removed the user interface for creating such volumes way back in Big Sur. It’s not really surprising that they’re going away, although only offering a year of warnings seems rather aggressive. Many people delay updating to major OS versions or wait until they get a new Mac. There will be users that switch to a Mac that can only run macOS 28 and get rid of their old one before realizing that some drive they haven’t connected in a while won’t mount.
The other surprising part is that Apple’s options—reformat or decrypt—are not great. During the initial transition to APFS, macOS would transparently convert an encrypted HFS+ boot volume to encrypted APFS without rewriting any data. This functionality is nominally still available via the diskutil apfs convert command, but Apple hasn’t mentioned this or built an automatic upgrader GUI.
[Decrypting] doesn’t apply to encrypted Time Machine backup disks.
It’s obvious why. The old Time Machine format with hard links is totally different from the new one based on APFS snapshots. But this means that you’ll either need to buy a new Time Machine drive for use with macOS 28 or delete your backup history. Even if you keep the old drive, you’ll need an older boot drive or an old Mac in order to be able to access it.
Apple has now revised the page to add a third option, allowing users to convert an encrypted HFS+ volume directly to encrypted APFS without decrypting it first.
[…]
The company has also removed its previous instructions for decrypting the volume first, converting it to APFS without erasing it, and then optionally re-encrypting it.
Ignore Apple’s guidance and do not use Convert to APFS in Disk Utility for disk images.
The first encrypted HFS+ disk image I tried to convert that way failed and left me with an unusable disk image. If I didn’t have backups I’d have lost its contents.
It didn’t corrupt the disk images that I tried, but it didn’t work, either, instead failing with an error about expecting a GPT partitioning scheme.
As encrypted disk images have never used CoreStorage, withdrawal of support for that has no impact on the continued use of any form of encrypted disk image, including those using HFS+ as their virtual file system.
This is a good point. Apple’s support page refers to “encrypted Mac OS Extended disks,” but the developer release notes refer to CoreStorage specifically. So this shouldn’t affect most encrypted disk images, which show up in Finder as unencrypted after mounting. The encryption is at the disk image level rather than at the file system level. However, I’m not sure that all encrypted disk images are safe. Presumably, a device image, which directly copies the blocks rather than the files, would still use CoreStorage.
The USB device drivers report that they are destroying the “Rocket XTRM Q” device due to a “link change interrupt”
APFS filesystem drivers report a “dangling mount”, failures to finish transactions before unmount, and dozens of “media is not present” errors.[…]
storagekit collects a report of the “disappeared” devices and notices that one of them was mounted. This is ultimately what leads to the “Disk Not Ejected Properly” notification.
Unfortunately, nothing in here explains what caused the “link change interrupt”; all we know is that the USB device drivers detected an interruption.
Not discussed here, perhaps because there’s little we can do about it, is the role of changes to macOS. I’ve documented problems in the past of hard drives, which used to work perfectly, suddenly start spontaneously unmounting with every backup after updating to a new OS version. The Sierra to Big Sur period was particularly bad, as I recall. (There are also some hard drive enclosures, and cheap SSDs, that seem to be problematic to matter the OS version, but I don’t continue to use those.) Sometime around Monterey or Ventura, the spontaneous unmounts almost completely disappeared for me, though Ventura introduced other mounting/unmountingproblems. Last week, I finally updated to Tahoe, and I’m sad to say that spontaneous unmounts are back. Almost every night, one of my Samsung SSDs—connected to a Thunderbolt dock—gets reported as improperly ejected. Sometimes it remounts by itself; other times I have to unplug and replug it.
As part of the upgrade, the Home app uses AI to generate summaries of motion alerts from compatible HomeKit Secure Video cameras.
[…]
Apple likely requires the 2TB iCloud+ tier because HomeKit Secure Video already relies on iCloud+ storage tiers. The 2TB plan supports a larger number of cameras, and AI-generated video descriptions would add to Apple’s cloud processing costs.
That makes sense, but it seems odd because the iCloud tiers are named based on storage amounts, yet the feature isn’t tied to how much space you’re actually using. A lower iCloud plan with tons of free space doesn’t get the features, yet a nearly full 2 TB plan does. There are already restrictions where supporting more cameras requires higher plans, but that is at least quasi related to storage.
I reluctantly upgraded to a 2 TB family plan within the last year or so. We don’t store many files in iCloud, messages are set to auto-delete after a year, and I manually offload photos older than a year (except for hearted favorites). It’s hard to believe given how I remember the original 5 GB free tier once being sufficient, but staying under 200 GB became untenable without a lot of extra work. It doesn’t help that Live Photos sometimes gets inadvertently turned on, so that we’re storing all these little videos without realizing it.
CATL has signed a memorandum of understanding with Dutch energy company Alfen to deploy 5 GWh of its Tener Sodium energy storage systems across Europe, one of the largest sodium-ion commitments the region has seen.
The batteries are rated for 15,000 cycles and a 25-to-30-year service life — the pitch that sodium-ion’s longevity, not its energy density, is what wins grid storage.
Bacterial cellulose—nature’s own polymer scaffold—is gaining attention as a renewable feedstock for supercapacitor electrodes. With modern devices demanding fast charge, high power bursts, and long cycle life, researchers are searching for electrode materials that combine performance with sustainability.
A new systematic literature review led by Prof. Dahlang Tahir at Hasanuddin University, Indonesia, maps how bacterial cellulose-derived carbon (BCC) is turned into energy-storage electrodes—and why some fabrication paths outperform others. The study synthesizes evidence from the scientific record to clarify which processing choices control electrochemical behavior.
The review focuses on BCC as a precursor to porous carbon. Bacterial cellulose forms a naturally pure, interconnected network of nanoscale fibers, and heat treatment can convert that architecture into carbon structures with tunable porosity—critical for charge storage. The authors emphasize that electrical performance is not just a matter of “making carbon,” but of preserving and engineering the fiber network before carbonization.
Across 49 Scopus-indexed journal articles, the team compares major strategies including direct carbonization, chemical activation to enlarge pore systems, heteroatom doping to modify surface chemistry, and composite fabrication with materials that can add rapid redox (pseudocapacitive) contributions.
A recurring message is the importance of pre-carbonization drying. Freeze-drying appears as the most commonly used approach because it limits collapse of the wet nanofiber structure during water removal. Since pore architecture governs ion access and charge transport, maintaining nanoscale structure can translate into higher effective capacitance.
The review also distinguishes test formats. Three-electrode measurements are frequently reported, but two-electrode devices better represent real supercapacitor operation, where electrode–electrode interactions shape performance.
When processing is optimized, the results point toward a pathway for BCC-based electrodes to rival or surpass commercial activated carbon under comparable conditions. Activation and heteroatom doping generally increase accessible surface area and create additional active sites, while composites often achieve the strongest capacitance by combining electrical double-layer effects with fast surface reactions.
Yet the authors warn that progress is constrained by inconsistent experimental reporting, uneven protocols, and limited mechanistic understanding. To move beyond laboratory demonstrations, they call for predictive design, data-driven structure–performance models, scalable carbonization methods, and robust flexible devices resistant to deformation and humidity.
Subject of Research: Supercapacitor electrodes using bacterial cellulose-derived carbon Article Title: Bacterial cellulose-derived carbon electrodes for supercapacitors: Fabrication strategies, electrochemical performance, and mechanical properties — A review News Publication Date: 9 June 2026 Web References: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.est.2026.123044 References: 10.1016/j.est.2026.123044 Image Credits: Lightenoughtotravel from Wikimedia Commons
Keywords
bacterial cellulose; supercapacitors; porous carbon; freeze-drying; chemical activation; heteroatom doping; electrode materials; two-electrode testing; pseudocapacitance; sustainable energy storage