Go Back   MacRumors Forums > Apple Hardware > Desktops > Mac mini

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old Nov 17, 2012, 12:45 PM   #1
adjuster
macrumors member
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Which SSD brand give best performance over time?

I have always used OWC SSD's because of the benefits of the SandForce controller: SandForce DuraClass™ technology with ultra-efficient block management & wear leveling offers highest endurance and performance in a SSD. According to the tests I have read, other SSD's slow down after considerable use.

Here is why I am confused:
- One post in this forum says the SandForce controller does not work well. A clear reason was not provided.
- Others recommend the Samsung 830. Why? I understand that Apple uses that model, but what if I put it in an external enclosure to use a boot drive. I have done this with the Macsales SSD and it works well on a 2012 MacMini. And will adding a Samsung 830 have the same performance as buying one from Apple?
- Others use Intel. Some Intel models use the SandForce controller, but are all versions of that controller the same?

I would appreciate your thoughts on this. Have scoured the forum and I cannot find an answer. If one exists please direct me to it and accept my apologies for not finding it myself.
adjuster is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 17, 2012, 12:57 PM   #2
philipma1957
macrumors 603
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by adjuster View Post
I have always used OWC SSD's because of the benefits of the SandForce controller: SandForce DuraClass™ technology with ultra-efficient block management & wear leveling offers highest endurance and performance in a SSD. According to the tests I have read, other SSD's slow down after considerable use.

Here is why I am confused:
- One post in this forum says the SandForce controller does not work well. A clear reason was not provided.
- Others recommend the Samsung 830. Why? I understand that Apple uses that model, but what if I put it in an external enclosure to use a boot drive. I have done this with the Macsales SSD and it works well on a 2012 MacMini. And will adding a Samsung 830 have the same performance as buying one from Apple?
- Others use Intel. Some Intel models use the SandForce controller, but are all versions of that controller the same?



I would appreciate your thoughts on this. Have scoured the forum and I cannot find an answer. If one exists please direct me to it and accept my apologies for not finding it myself.


sandforce have a higher failure rate then samsung 830's or crucial m4's. bottom line is get an ssd from a company that will back it up rma wise. owc is good if your gear breaks. I have sand force intels and mushkin
all good . I have samsung 800's 810's 830's all good I have crucial m4's also all good.
philipma1957 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 17, 2012, 01:46 PM   #3
motrek
macrumors 6502a
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Quote:
Originally Posted by adjuster View Post
I have always used OWC SSD's because of the benefits of the SandForce controller: SandForce DuraClass™ technology with ultra-efficient block management & wear leveling offers highest endurance and performance in a SSD. According to the tests I have read, other SSD's slow down after considerable use.

Here is why I am confused:
- One post in this forum says the SandForce controller does not work well. A clear reason was not provided.
- Others recommend the Samsung 830. Why? I understand that Apple uses that model, but what if I put it in an external enclosure to use a boot drive. I have done this with the Macsales SSD and it works well on a 2012 MacMini. And will adding a Samsung 830 have the same performance as buying one from Apple?
- Others use Intel. Some Intel models use the SandForce controller, but are all versions of that controller the same?

I would appreciate your thoughts on this. Have scoured the forum and I cannot find an answer. If one exists please direct me to it and accept my apologies for not finding it myself.
First of all, there's nothing wrong with SandForce in particular, and even Intel is now using them for controllers, and Intel makes the drives that are most commonly trusted for enterprise and industrial level installations. If SandForce is good enough for Intel, it's good enough for you.

Second, to answer your question of best performance over time, I would get a drive that's obviously overprovisioned. Get a 120GB drive instead of 128GB because you can be pretty sure it really has 128GB of memory, and it just keeps 8GB erased and ready for writing all the time. So no matter how full the drive is or how much data you've written to it in the past, it will still perform like new.

In theory, if you have TRIM working right (on your drive *and* OS) then you are supposed to get the same benefit--i.e., that unused space is erased and ready to be written to--but it's sometimes a hassle to enable TRIM and then you have to trust that it's actually working.
motrek is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 17, 2012, 03:16 PM   #4
davidlv
macrumors 65816
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Kyoto, Japan
Quote:
Originally Posted by motrek View Post
In theory, if you have TRIM working right (on your drive *and* OS) then you are supposed to get the same benefit--i.e., that unused space is erased and ready to be written to--but it's sometimes a hassle to enable TRIM and then you have to trust that it's actually working.
Now that ChameleonSSDOptimizer is available for the Mac platform, enabling trim is very easy, click-click done. It has other options too, enabling noatime, etc., which basically reduces your IO volume. You can check to see if Trim is enabled using the System Profiler (Menu, About this Mac, More Info, System Report, Serial-ATA, and scrolling down it should say;
Trim enabled Yes. )
SSDs all have their own characteristic features, and strengths/weaknesses, 'cause very company uses different controllers/firmware. Due to technical reasons beyond me, related to un-compressed versus compressed data, SandForce-based and Crucial SSDs do not have blazing write speeds as shown by utilities like the Blackmagic Disk Speed Test, yet they are lightning fast in actual use, especially on later model MBPs etc., that have 6GB/s SATA III connections.
__________________
MacBook Pro 15" Late 2011, 2.2GHz, 16GB Patriot RAM, 256GB Plextor M5P Xtreme SSD ; Mac Mini 2011 Base model 8GB RAM, 256GB Plextor M5S SSD
davidlv is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 17, 2012, 04:29 PM   #5
adjuster
Thread Starter
macrumors member
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Quote:
Originally Posted by davidlv View Post
Now that ChameleonSSDOptimizer is available for the Mac platform, enabling trim is very easy, click-click done. It has other options too, enabling noatime, etc., which basically reduces your IO volume. You can check to see if Trim is enabled using the System Profiler (Menu, About this Mac, More Info, System Report, Serial-ATA, and scrolling down it should say;
Trim enabled Yes. )
I am confused. I thought the benefit of SandForce is that you don't have to use trim? Do Macs play well with trim? Is it a benefit with SandForce or something else to go wrong?
adjuster is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 18, 2012, 10:14 AM   #6
Weaselboy
Moderator
 
Weaselboy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: California
Quote:
Originally Posted by adjuster View Post
I am confused. I thought the benefit of SandForce is that you don't have to use trim? Do Macs play well with trim? Is it a benefit with SandForce or something else to go wrong?
Some Sandforce firmware applications seem to have trouble with the TRIM hack. For example, OWC explicitly says not to do it as it causes instability. You will see user reports here in the forums with this same thing.

But at the same time, we have Apple shipping their new Macbook Airs with native TRIM on in a Sandforce controlled Toshiba SSD with no problems.

So I think all we can conclude at this point is with some Sandforce firmware/hardware combinations, TRIM causes problems.
Weaselboy is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 18, 2012, 12:07 PM   #7
motrek
macrumors 6502a
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Quote:
Originally Posted by Weaselboy View Post
Some Sandforce firmware applications seem to have trouble with the TRIM hack. For example, OWC explicitly says not to do it as it causes instability. You will see user reports here in the forums with this same thing.

But at the same time, we have Apple shipping their new Macbook Airs with native TRIM on in a Sandforce controlled Toshiba SSD with no problems.

So I think all we can conclude at this point is with some Sandforce firmware/hardware combinations, TRIM causes problems.
I will repeat my advice to buy a drive that's obviously overprovisioned and you will never have to spend even a fraction of a second worrying about TRIM.
motrek is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 19, 2012, 07:53 AM   #8
peterson12
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Quote:
Originally Posted by Weaselboy View Post
Some Sandforce firmware applications seem to have trouble with the TRIM hack. For example, OWC explicitly says not to do it as it causes instability. You will see user reports here in the forums with this same thing.

But at the same time, we have Apple shipping their new Macbook Airs with native TRIM on in a Sandforce controlled Toshiba SSD with no problems.

So I think all we can conclude at this point is with some Sandforce firmware/hardware combinations, TRIM causes problems.
Guess TRIM by default on in all controllers, its upto the manufacturer to enable it or not
peterson12 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 22, 2012, 02:47 AM   #9
keema
macrumors member
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
here in UAE, Abu Dhabi I can only see Intel 330 SSD and the from Kingston.

Which one will you choose if you only have these 2 to choose from?

Thanks,
Christian
keema is offline   0 Reply With Quote

Reply
MacRumors Forums > Apple Hardware > Desktops > Mac mini

Tags
mac mini, ssd

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Similar Threads
thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Samsung 840 ssd with macbook pro 2008 does not give the best performance sppl MacBook Pro 17 Mar 6, 2014 05:34 AM
Poor SSD on Mac Pro 5,1 (2010) with two different ssd brand Randall Flagg Mac Pro 9 Jan 4, 2014 02:51 PM
What will give me best performance? xjosh Mac Peripherals 4 Jun 14, 2013 07:39 AM
SSD/HDD Combo...HDD very poor access time/performance TahoeDust MacBook Pro 7 Jun 13, 2013 03:24 AM
Will a new HD give a performance boost to a 2006 iMac? furry-ninja iMac 3 Nov 11, 2012 12:13 PM

Forum Jump

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:57 AM.

Mac Rumors | Mac | iPhone | iPhone Game Reviews | iPhone Apps

Mobile Version | Fixed | Fluid | Fluid HD
Copyright 2002-2013, MacRumors.com, LLC