Report: Apple to use Samsung 830s in new MBPs

psykick5 · May 17, 2012

http://9to5mac.com/2012/05/17/new-macbook-pros-will-get-samsungs-830-series-ssd-too/

This could mean a lot to SSD speeds! Using the best of the best

It seemed major enough to make a separate thread for :/

Ccrew · May 17, 2012

psykick5 said:
http://9to5mac.com/2012/05/17/new-macbook-pros-will-get-samsungs-830-series-ssd-too/

This could mean a lot to SSD speeds! Using the best of the best

It seemed major enough to make a separate thread for :/

You know, if these rumors are all true, between retina and SSD I think we're going to be looking at $3k for a blinged 15"

Blues003 · May 17, 2012

I find the title misleading. I don't doubt Apple can use Samsung 830s as SSDs for the MBP; what I doubt is that that will be the baseline configuration. SSDs are still very expensive for Apple to toss one and provide even half of the storage they provide today with HDDs (500GB at base). Specially if you account in the added cost a Retina Display could have.

Ccrew · May 17, 2012

Blues003 said:
I find the title misleading. I don't doubt Apple can use Samsung 830s as SSDs for teh MBP; what I doubt is that that will be the baseline configuration. SSDs are still very expensive for Apple to toss one and provide even half of the storage they provide today with HDDs (500GB at base). Specially if you account in the added cost a Retina Display could have.

But the Bloomberg release did say that the new MBP's would use "flash memory to increase boot speeds". Equate that to the huge user base that calls drives memory instead and SSD is indeed the takeaway.

Blues003 · May 17, 2012

Ccrew said:
But the Bloomberg release did say that the new MBP's would use "flash memory to increase boot speeds". Equate that to the huge user base that calls drives memory instead and SSD is indeed the takeaway.

Bloomberg reported "flash memory to cut startup times and extend battery life". This can mean simply a small bit of flash memory for OS-booting, and HDD for everything else. Flash memory doesn't necessarily mean a full-blown SSD as the main disk.

apolloa · May 17, 2012

Blues003 said:
I find the title misleading. I don't doubt Apple can use Samsung 830s as SSDs for the MBP; what I doubt is that that will be the baseline configuration. SSDs are still very expensive for Apple to toss one and provide even half of the storage they provide today with HDDs (500GB at base). Specially if you account in the added cost a Retina Display could have.

That's exactly what I thought, the title seems to proclaim as a fact they will be used, then you read the story and some guy told another guy he apparently saw a few of the new prototype MB Pro's with Samsung SSD's in them!!

I am not going to state Apple won't use them, but the 9to5mac story needs to be taken with a very large pinch of salt.

Ccrew said:
But the Bloomberg release did say that the new MBP's would use "flash memory to increase boot speeds". Equate that to the huge user base that calls drives memory instead and SSD is indeed the takeaway.

Flash memory could mean mSata or Blade SSD drives up to maybe a max of 64 or 128gb. Then you add on a normal 2.5" drive for main storage.

bozz2006 · May 17, 2012

apolloa said:
Flash memory could mean mSata or Blade SSD drives up to maybe a max of 64 or 128gb. Then you add on a normal 2.5" drive for main storage.

I'd thought that too. Maybe some non-removable flash where the OS resides? This is shaping up to be one seriously expensive computer.

NewGuyHere · May 17, 2012

They will most likely use a hybrid drive like he said. I doubt they will use a full sad, and if they do it will be of very small capacity.

apolloa · May 17, 2012

bozz2006 said:
I'd thought that too. Maybe some non-removable flash where the OS resides? This is shaping up to be one seriously expensive computer.

Not if they use mSata, Alienware use it on the M14X and that and charge £130 for a 64GB mSata drive plus a 500GB 7200RPM HDD.

But you can buy OCZ mSata drives, or Intel ones to upgrade.

----------

NewGuyHere said:
They will most likely use a hybrid drive like he said. I doubt they will use a full sad, and if they do it will be of very small capacity.

That would limit Apple to one Supplier I think, which is Seagate, and the drive height would be 9.3mm which then raises the question why drop the ethernet port as it's 1 cm in height etc etc etc.
I think Apple will offer mSata personally.

MOKHAN · May 17, 2012

Hmm, I wonder how much they'll be charging for the base 13" MBP. Definitely higher than the current prices?

NewGuyHere · May 17, 2012

MOKHAN said:
Hmm, I wonder how much they'll be charging for the base 13" MBP. Definitely higher than the current prices?

Probably the same, since there is no optical drive in there, maybe they will take out some things for less $

MOKHAN · May 17, 2012

NewGuyHere said:
Probably the same, since there is no optical drive in there, maybe they will take out some things for less $

Haha, that's what we're all hoping for, but I doubt it.
When Apple introduced the unibody Macbook Pro's in late 2008, the 13" came in at $1999!

bozz2006 · May 17, 2012

MOKHAN said:
Haha, that's what we're all hoping for, but I doubt it.
When Apple introduced the unibody Macbook Pro's in late 2008, the 13" came in at $1999!

There was no unibody 13" MacBook Pro in 2008.

MOKHAN · May 17, 2012

bozz2006 said:
There was no unibody 13" MacBook Pro in 2008.

http://www.everymac.com/systems/app...-2.4-aluminum-15-late-2008-unibody-specs.html

bozz2006 · May 17, 2012

MOKHAN said:
http://www.everymac.com/systems/app...-2.4-aluminum-15-late-2008-unibody-specs.html

Actually, when the unibody MacBook Pros were released in October 2008, they came out with an aluminum unibody MacBook. I bought one on release. They rebranded it MacBook Pro in the summer of 2009. And neither of them cost $1999.

"At Apple's Worldwide Developers Conference (WWDC) on June 8, 2009, it was announced that the 13-inch unibody MacBook would be upgraded and re-branded as a MacBook Pro," from the MacBook Pro Wikipedia page.

MOKHAN · May 17, 2012

bozz2006 said:
Actually, when the unibody MacBook Pros were released in October 2008, they came out with an aluminum unibody MacBook. I bought one on release. They rebranded it MacBook Pro in the summer of 2009. And neither of them cost $1999.

"At Apple's Worldwide Developers Conference (WWDC) on June 8, 2009, it was announced that the 13-inch unibody MacBook would be upgraded and re-branded as a MacBook Pro," from the MacBook Pro Wikipedia page.

You're absolutely right. Thank you for enlightening me.
I wonder what price EveryMac has listed there.

bozz2006 · May 17, 2012

Maybe the price they have listed was for a 15". There's no way I could've convinced my wife to let me spend $2000. And I got one. A late 2008 aluminum unibody 13" MacBook. I still have it, in fact. I believe it was around $1200.

Search

Search

Report: Apple to use Samsung 830s in new MBPs

psykick5

macrumors 6502

Ccrew

macrumors 68020

Blues003

macrumors 6502

Ccrew

macrumors 68020

Blues003

macrumors 6502

apolloa

Suspended

bozz2006

macrumors 68030

NewGuyHere

macrumors regular

apolloa

Suspended

MOKHAN

macrumors 6502

NewGuyHere

macrumors regular

MOKHAN

macrumors 6502

bozz2006

macrumors 68030

MOKHAN

macrumors 6502

bozz2006

macrumors 68030

MOKHAN

macrumors 6502

bozz2006

macrumors 68030

Our Staff