What size SSD to get

Discussion in 'Mac Pro' started by brianric, Sep 17, 2013.

  1. macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2011
    #1
    I have a 2010 Mac Pro. I have a Sonnet Pro PCI express card arriving tomorrow, and plan on putting a Crucial 960 GB on it. I plan on adding a second SSD for the OS. My present boot drive takes 119 GB of room. Will a 256 GB SSD be sufficient, or should I go for a 512 GB SSD?
     
  2. macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2013
    #2
    Buy the largest you can afford. It's a general rule that's never gone out of date.
     
  3. macrumors 603

    VirtualRain

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2008
    Location:
    Vancouver, BC
    #3
    +1 ;)
     
  4. macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2012
    #4
    usually another great old is to put the OS and applications on the fastest drive. Why don't use the 960 GB drive?
     
  5. macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2013
    #5
    Not sure everyone has $800 lying around for JUST a hd.

    240gb gives me enough for my os and heaps of apps, id do that and keep a mechanical hard drive for movies etc.
     
  6. thread starter macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2011
    #6
    I had planned on using it for Photoshop scratch drive and my working drive for my photo shoots.
     
  7. macrumors member

    k-hawinkler

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2011
    #7
    I am very happy with Crucial M4 and M500 and just upgraded a 512 GB SSD to a 960 GB in my 4 year old MacBook Pro. Also, I am using a RAID 0 consisting out of 4 Crucial 256 GB SSDs in an enclosure.

    As each storage location can be written only a limited number of times, IIRC about 3000 times, it's important not to fill an SSD entirely, as then certain storage locations get rewritten excessively and wear out too fast. So, I never fill an SSD more than about half.

    Relative to a harddisk an SSD runs very cool and puts less thermal stress on a system. Maxing out memory also avoids unnecessary writes.

    I am doing quite a bit of post-processing of images, have several TB of photos. Having the images stored on an external device and not on the system SSD has given me quite a performance boost even for simple tasks such as deleting a bunch of images in the finder.
     
  8. thread starter macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2011
    #8
    External device would kill me, no thanks. My plans are to use the Crucial 960 GB as my temporary work area for photos, and hold off on the second SSD, as I'm giving the 240 GB OWC Mercury Accelsior PCI Express SSD one last try before exploring the second SSD.
     
  9. macrumors member

    k-hawinkler

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2011
    #9
    Why?
     
  10. macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2005
  11. macrumors regular

    Dennis187

    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2010
    Location:
    below you
    #11
    ::::::::::::::::::::::> the better.. For me a 512GB at least suits my use best, for gaming etc.
     
  12. thread starter macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2011
    #12
    Too damn slow. I'm dealing with 200 to 1,200 files at a time, with a mix of 12 MP and 36 MP cameras. I boot into Windows to sort by time if using more than one camera, then use Pixort to cull. Boot back into Mac side and use Lightroom for editing and Aperture for cropping. It's a lot faster using a SSD. When finished I tranfer final product to a hd on the Mac, and backup to one internal and three external drives, which are FW800 and USB2.
     

Share This Page