ORICO Direct US Store via Amazon [amazon.com] has ORICO MiniTower 2-Bay RAID Enclosure for NVMe SSD, 10Gbps Speed, Expansion Hub Dock for Mac Mini M4 on sale for $89.99.49 - 20% off when you clip the coupon on the product page = $71.99. Shipping is free.
This collaborative space allows users to contribute additional information, tips, and insights to enhance the original deal post. Feel free to share your knowledge and help fellow shoppers make informed decisions.
ORICO Direct US Store via Amazon [amazon.com] has ORICO MiniTower 2-Bay RAID Enclosure for NVMe SSD, 10Gbps Speed, Expansion Hub Dock for Mac Mini M4 on sale for $89.99.49 - 20% off when you clip the coupon on the product page = $71.99. Shipping is free.
Seems odd to market this as specifically for Mac Mini M4 when it uses 10Gbps USB 3.2 instead of the much faster 40Gbps Thunderbolt 4 the standard M4's support and the even faster 120Gbps Thunderbolt 5 the Pro models support. Maybe they mean they matched the basic aesthetic of the Mini?
I guess in fairness, since it has two 3.5" bays you'll most likely use two 3.5" mechanical drives for max storage space or maybe two 2.5" SSD's for a bit more speed. That means even with the one NVMe port even with the fastest drives currently out you probably can't get much above 8,000Mbps combined, which is under the 10Gbps USB this would support. (My napkin math here is that based on current hardware the one NVMe could do 7,000Mbps and 2 x 2.5's SSD could do 560Mbps each for a total of 8,120MBps...)
So maybe it makes sense to save hardware and licensing costs, getting savings you can pass on to the consumer, by choosing USB instead of the more costly Thunderbolt.
Edit: See the comment below. It's actually much worse than I'm saying here because as the comment below points out I failed to consider that USB speeds are measured in bits so 1/8th of the speed of the drives measured in bytes. The means that just the two 560MBps 2.5" SSDs could use around 90% of the 10Gbps without even considering the faster NVMe.
Seems odd to market this as specifically for Mac Mini M4 when it uses 10Gbps USB 3.2 instead of the much faster 40Gbps Thunderbolt 4 the standard M4's support and the even faster 120Gbps Thunderbolt 5 the Pro models support. Maybe they mean they matched the basic aesthetic of the Mini?
I guess in fairness, since it has two 3.5" bays you'll most likely use two 3.5" mechanical drives for max storage space or maybe two 2.5" SSD's for a bit more speed. That means even with the one NVMe port even with the fastest drives currently out you probably can't get much above 8,000Mbps combined, which is under the 10Gbps USB this would support. (My napkin math here is that based on current hardware the one NVMe could do 7,000Mbps and 2 x 2.5's SSD could do 560Mbps each for a total of 8,120Mbps...)
So maybe it makes sense to save hardware and licensing costs, getting savings you can pass on to the consumer, by choosing USB instead of the more costly Thunderbolt.
No its well under that, even 40Gbps is capping a gen 3 drive. Drives are measured in bytes, the usb marketing speed is in bits.
So this thing has the max bandwidth of basically 2 sata ssd drives and only theoretically.
Seems ok for some kind of time machine/scheduled backup storage, but I wouldn't use it as a system drive.
Last edited by megablank November 13, 2025 at 12:02 PM.
Join The Conversation
Share your experience with the Slickdeals community
Share information with the community. Please follow our Community Guidelines and be kind!
4 Comments
Sign up for a Slickdeals account to remove this ad.
I guess in fairness, since it has two 3.5" bays you'll most likely use two 3.5" mechanical drives for max storage space or maybe two 2.5" SSD's for a bit more speed. That means even with the one NVMe port even with the fastest drives currently out you probably can't get much above 8,000Mbps combined, which is under the 10Gbps USB this would support. (My napkin math here is that based on current hardware the one NVMe could do 7,000Mbps and 2 x 2.5's SSD could do 560Mbps each for a total of 8,120MBps...)
So maybe it makes sense to save hardware and licensing costs, getting savings you can pass on to the consumer, by choosing USB instead of the more costly Thunderbolt.
Edit: See the comment below. It's actually much worse than I'm saying here because as the comment below points out I failed to consider that USB speeds are measured in bits so 1/8th of the speed of the drives measured in bytes. The means that just the two 560MBps 2.5" SSDs could use around 90% of the 10Gbps without even considering the faster NVMe.
I guess in fairness, since it has two 3.5" bays you'll most likely use two 3.5" mechanical drives for max storage space or maybe two 2.5" SSD's for a bit more speed. That means even with the one NVMe port even with the fastest drives currently out you probably can't get much above 8,000Mbps combined, which is under the 10Gbps USB this would support. (My napkin math here is that based on current hardware the one NVMe could do 7,000Mbps and 2 x 2.5's SSD could do 560Mbps each for a total of 8,120Mbps...)
So maybe it makes sense to save hardware and licensing costs, getting savings you can pass on to the consumer, by choosing USB instead of the more costly Thunderbolt.
So this thing has the max bandwidth of basically 2 sata ssd drives and only theoretically.
Seems ok for some kind of time machine/scheduled backup storage, but I wouldn't use it as a system drive.
So this thing has the max bandwidth of basically 2 sata ssd drives and only theoretically.
Seems ok for some kind of time machine/scheduled backup storage, but I wouldn't use it as a system drive.
Join The Conversation
Share your experience with the Slickdeals community
Share information with the community. Please follow our Community Guidelines and be kind!