Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
256GB SSD vs 512GB SSD. Which one?
- Thread starter chelch
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Considering that USB 3.0 and Thunderbolt drive enclosures offer near-internal speeds, and third party SSDs are down below $1/GB, I'd go with 256GB. 128GB can be a bit tight but 256GB allows you to keep all your programs and your most frequently used data internal.
I went with a 256GB SSD on my 13" rMBP.
I went with a 256GB SSD on my 13" rMBP.
Is it worth the extra $500 for the 512GB SSD in a new rMBP? Either option will require external storage at some point. Which one have you picked?
Thanks!
no you can find it cheaper and install it yourself
oh and i bought the crucial m4 512
I picked 256gb, will be getting the OWC offering. That way you get to keep your 256GB internal in fast USB3 enclosure.Is it worth the extra $500 for the 512GB SSD in a new rMBP? Either option will require external storage at some point. Which one have you picked?
Thanks!
actually TB has more bandwidth than SATA3.
upgrade every other thing in my rMBP, the SSD i will change with one OWC when i need the extra space.
Have a desktop HHD with 2 TB, and a mobile USB 3.0 750GB HHD.
And then some USB thumps
Have a desktop HHD with 2 TB, and a mobile USB 3.0 750GB HHD.
And then some USB thumps
I agree here. Buy the most you can afford. You never know how space requirements will change and get bigger.
Initially I had bought a rMBP 2.7, 16gb 256. I must've got a dud, it lagged like crazy. Had an LG screen as well, which I wasn't thrilled about. Anyways, returned to apple. Didn't feel like waiting for a new one and bought the 2.6 8gb ram 512 ssd model. Got a samsung screen too! Honestly, much happier with this decision and love the extra space allowing to work with large files internally when I want to/on the go.. Sure I would've liked more ram but by the time I become bottlnecked with 8gb I'll be buying a new machine anyway.
Perhaps you should get 256GB and wait until you reach "some point" - 960GB SSDs have recently been announced and although those particular ones may not work in a rMBP, odds are that a year down the road you'll be able to give your rMBP a midlife boost to a 1TB or so SSD.
Is it worth the extra $500 for the 512GB SSD in a new rMBP? Either option will require external storage at some point. Which one have you picked?
Thanks!
If I were you, I would simply go for 512GB. Don't think about upgrading later. Just go for it and you won't regret it.
afaik 512GB refurb was around $2200-2300...which is fairly decent considering that's about $400 of technology.
Also rMBP takes mSATA, so the prices for those are bound to go lower. Ram is soldered on, though, so I would prefer 16GB RAM over the extra 256GB of space.
Also rMBP takes mSATA, so the prices for those are bound to go lower. Ram is soldered on, though, so I would prefer 16GB RAM over the extra 256GB of space.
http://i.imgur.com/u2kMcsR.jpg
You are correct. But I think these are going to be standard sized "Ultrathin" portable SSD's, and will be available more widely.
http://techreport.com/news/24182/micron-and-crucial-introduce-next-gen-m500-ssd
rMBPs use the flash memory's instead of the traditional 2.5in drives.
And those are still expensive today...
Unfortunately, nobody is really making them (sans $$$OWC$$$). However, in the future, I think you'll see them become more readily available AND come down in price.
So if 256GB will run most of your Apps in addition to OSX, sure, go for it. If you use a spinning disk as external, then I'd stick with USB 3.0. A spinning disk (especially a 2.5" disk, which I'd recommend for an external for the portability and ability to run purely off of USB power) won't saturate USB 3.0, so buying a thunderbolt enclosure for a single spinning disk is a waste and won't really be any faster. (I get the same speeds with my stock 500GB Hard Drive in a USB 3.0 enclosure as I did when it was internal).
However, if you want FAST external storage, a thunderbolt connected SSD will be every bit as fast as one mounted internally.
I mean, if you've got the dough, go for it. But otherwise, I think running the 256 will work for now.
Another option, though, is to order the 128 and then get the OWC 480GB upgrade which is $580. That's almost $200 more than a comparable 2.5" drive, but still cheaper than what Apple is asking. Then just do the upgrade yourself. They also sell an enclosure for the stock drive, so you could have a zippy SSD external as well.
So if 256GB will run most of your Apps in addition to OSX, sure, go for it. If you use a spinning disk as external, then I'd stick with USB 3.0. A spinning disk (especially a 2.5" disk, which I'd recommend for an external for the portability and ability to run purely off of USB power) won't saturate USB 3.0, so buying a thunderbolt enclosure for a single spinning disk is a waste and won't really be any faster. (I get the same speeds with my stock 500GB Hard Drive in a USB 3.0 enclosure as I did when it was internal).
However, if you want FAST external storage, a thunderbolt connected SSD will be every bit as fast as one mounted internally.
I mean, if you've got the dough, go for it. But otherwise, I think running the 256 will work for now.
Another option, though, is to order the 128 and then get the OWC 480GB upgrade which is $580. That's almost $200 more than a comparable 2.5" drive, but still cheaper than what Apple is asking. Then just do the upgrade yourself. They also sell an enclosure for the stock drive, so you could have a zippy SSD external as well.
I had read somewhere that SSD tech will likely change dramatically in a couple of years so the current crop will see little drop in price. The article you posted here makes for very different reading...
I'm still trying to decide between the rMBP and the cMBP. If if can get the cMBP with an HDD but then upgarde to a 1TB SSD in a couple of years... that could swing it.
Bear in mind that, with the "classic" MacBook Pro, you can get a kit to replace the optical drive with a second HDD, so you can have a small-ish SSD + a huge HDD and either set up a DIY 'Fusion' drive or just manually shift large/seldom used files to the physical HDD.
you can't, 256gb is minimum with retina
13" is 128Gb and 512GB upgrade is whopping 800$ from Apple.
It's a good thought but having the optical drive built in is the main reason I'm considering that model. If I go with it, I'm sure it'll be the last computer I buy with an ODD but I'm not ready to go without it just yet and I'd prefer to have it built in. I think the retina is a far nicer machine but having to carry around external storage and ODD isn't an attractive prospect.
So the question is, how much storage do you need 'on the move'?
If ~1TB would be enough then get a Classic with a 1TB HDD then slap in a 1TB SSD when they become affordable, which seems to be on the cards for the coming year. Since the classic will take a generic 2.5" SATA package you won't have to wait for someone to produce a rMBP-specific card or pay for 256GB of SSD (which won't hold its resale value for long) along with the base model.
I was having a tough time deciding the same. Had a BTO rMBP. Must've gotten a dud as it lagged like crazy. I was really unhappy and though that it was a widespread problem, juding by the amount of complaints on these very fourms. I returned it for a cMBP.
The problem was going back to that screen after looking at the retina. So one more time, I took it back and tried the retina again. I'm glad to say this one is running stellar. Not to say the rMBP's are without issues, but so far I haven't encountered any on this new machine. I am glad I went with the retina in the end and I think you will be too, if you decide to go that route.
Overall I just find it to be a nicer machine for what I use it for, but only you know what's important for your needs. Whatever you decide i'm sure you'll be happy. They're both great.
If you'll need addition storage anyway, might as well go with the lowest SSD offered and use an external Thunderbolt or USB 3 drive for big stuff that you use infrequently.
I went with the 13" rMBP 128GB SSD because 256GB wasn't even enough (and neither was 512GB really). And I could buy another computer for what Apple wants for 768GB.
I went with the 13" rMBP 128GB SSD because 256GB wasn't even enough (and neither was 512GB really). And I could buy another computer for what Apple wants for 768GB.