Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

13'' 2010 MBP...ANY reason to get a 6Gb/s SSD?

S

Silverstring

macrumors 6502
Original poster
Apr 30, 2005
486
830
I have the 2.4 2010 13'' MBP with 8GB RAM.

I have been looking at SSDs for awhile, specifically a 120GB models from OWC.

http://eshop.macsales.com/item/OWC/SSDMX115/

Now that the OWC drives have gone from 34nm to 25nm NAND (and thus, from 120GB to 115GB and 11% provisioning), I am wondering if there is any reason for me to opt for the more expensive new "6G" model (and the $90 difference).

http://eshop.macsales.com/item/Other World Computing/SSDMX6G120/

-Will I get more formatted capacity in the 6G? (One listed at 120, the other at 115)?
-Is the 6G 34nm? I anecdotally heard these were somehow "better than 25nm, although I don't know how/why.
-Will the 6G still somehow be faster on the 3Gb/s interface both drives will be limited to on my 2010 MBP? (I realize this seems like a silly question, but I'm not knowledgeable enough about drives to know if there are other differences/factors besides the SATA interface that affect speed)
-Will the only advantage be having a more "future-proof" (yes, I realize that is a nonsense term, but you know what I mean) SSD that I could then move to another machine that has the faster interface? If so, since I don't plan on replacing my laptop soon, I think I'll just go with the older model.

Thanks in advance to everyone who replies.
 
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPod; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_2_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8C148 Safari/6533.18.5)

Silverstring said:
I have the 2.4 2010 13'' MBP with 8GB RAM.

I have been looking at SSDs for awhile, specifically a 120GB models from OWC.

http://eshop.macsales.com/item/OWC/SSDMX115/

Now that the OWC drives have gone from 34nm to 25nm NAND (and thus, from 120GB to 115GB and 11% provisioning), I am wondering if there is any reason for me to opt for the more expensive new "6G" model (and the $90 difference).

http://eshop.macsales.com/item/Other World Computing/SSDMX6G120/

-Will I get more formatted capacity in the 6G? (One listed at 120, the other at 115)?
-Is the 6G 34nm? I anecdotally heard these were somehow "better than 25nm, although I don't know how/why.
-Will the 6G still somehow be faster on the 3Gb/s interface both drives will be limited to on my 2010 MBP? (I realize this seems like a silly question, but I'm not knowledgeable enough about drives to know if there are other differences/factors besides the SATA interface that affect speed)
-Will the only advantage be having a more "future-proof" (yes, I realize that is a nonsense term, but you know what I mean) SSD that I could then move to another machine that has the faster interface? If so, since I don't plan on replacing my laptop soon, I think I'll just go with the older model.

Thanks in advance to everyone who replies.
Click to expand...

If you plan on updating soon get a 6Gb/s SSD. if not go OWC or Vertex 2, cheap fast reliable and pretty much max out sata2
 
get it from newegg. I just got a 60 gb vertex 2 for $85

Newegg is offering, for new customers only, $25 off $100 with coupon code NEWTAX25. Thanks xinghkNote, you need to sign-up for newsletter first (http://slickdeals.net/?pno=50093&lno=2&afsrc=1), then use the code. This coupon will not work in conjunction with any other promotion codes.
 
If you buy a 6 Gbps, you can use it in your next MacBook Pro. SATA 6 Gbps should long some years. If you plan to keep your 2010 unit, any good SATA 3 Gbps SSD will be fine. Crucial C300 is a good choice, his price goes down.
 
Exana said:
If you buy a 6 Gbps, you can use it in your next MacBook Pro. SATA 6 Gbps should long some years. If you plan to keep your 2010 unit, any good SATA 3 Gbps SSD will be fine. Crucial C300 is a good choice, his price goes down.
Click to expand...

IMO prices will drop enough that you could buy a sata II drive now and than wait until sata III drives come down when you buy your next mbp; etc.
 
Don't buy a 6gb sata as your chipset does not support it. Buy a fast sad drive from the last generation like the vertex 2.
 
The advice here seems pretty spot on.

If you are planning on keeping your 2010 for a few years, then just go with a SATA II. Many of the SATA III drives actually seem to run slower than many SATA II drives if running on SATA II (or at best only equal), plus you are paying more for them. You might as well buy a SATA II now and in a few years from now you will get a much larger SSD for probably the same price as a small one today.

If you are planning on upgrading soon, then go SATA III.
 
Wirelessly posted (Johnny iphone: Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8G4 Safari/6533.18.5)

paulrbeers said:
The advice here seems pretty spot on.

If you are planning on keeping your 2010 for a few years, then just go with a SATA II. Many of the SATA III drives actually seem to run slower than many SATA II drives if running on SATA II (or at best only equal), plus you are paying more for them. You might as well buy a SATA II now and in a few years from now you will get a much larger SSD for probably the same price as a small one today.

If you are planning on upgrading soon, then go SATA III.
Click to expand...

That's curious, over at the ocz forums, in the weeks leading to the vertex 3 being released most test confirmed that the vertex 3 (6gb/s) runining on a sata2 interface will still run much faster -having higher write speeds compared to a vertex 2?
 
CeIiK.png


Here is a overall disk speed test from this Anandtech test of the Vertex 3. The tests without the (6Gbps) shown are the same drive at a SATA II connection. You can see there is surprisingly little speed drop in this test by using only SATA II.

With SATA III the big bump seems to be large sequential reads/writes, and that is something most of us don't do a lot.

Here is a quote from Anand describing what this test does.

For those of you who aren’t familiar with PCMark Vantage, it ends up being the most real-world-like hard drive test I can come up with. It runs things like application launches, file searches, web browsing, contacts searching, video playback, photo editing and other completely mundane but real-world tasks.
Click to expand...

I think sometimes we obsess a little much over small differences in test results. I suspect without a benchmarking tool you would not be able to tell the difference among most of these drives in day to day usage. But the drive you think is from a reliable company and that you think will be compatible with your machine. JMO :)
 
I stand by my comments. The new Vertex 3 with the upgraded Sandforce chipset is running basically as fast (200 points is negligible difference) as the Vertex 2 would (same controller as the corsair F120 in this benchmark). If you look at consecutive and random read writes it is slightly below:

http://www.anandtech.com/show/4256/the-ocz-vertex-3-review-120gb/6

So again. The new SATA III based SSD controllers by Sandforce, run no better (and a bit worse on some benchmarks) if run at SATA II speeds if comparing the same size drives. I do agree though on a day to day basis, you will not notice a difference. Heck I rarely notice a difference in drive speeds of my old Sandforce 120GB drive vs my new Apple 128GB drive (even though the Apple drive is considerably slower in benchmarks).
 
The new OWC 6.0 runs faster than the Vertex 3 6.0, but this is a small and probably not statistically significant difference. Both use the latest SandForce drives, which was announced only about a year ago and until 6 months ago, the 500MBP/s mark from a single hard drive was a futuristic goofball figure. Both run at a speed that most existing Benchmark software was not designed to measure.

Please don't remind me that the Apple SSD is only a SATA2 Toshiba...you are making me sad and angry at Apple. :( :mad:

As far as which to go with OP, go for a quality 32nm SATA2 systems unless you find something cheaper. Even if you get a SATA3 drive and upgrade, the difference of using a SATA2 versus 3 SSD with current software is debatable in regards to what the large majority of users do****. Until I see a side-by-side comparison of the newer MBP with the factory SSD and a 6.0 SSD perform normal functions and not benchmarks, I will not purchase one. The Vertex 2 and Mercury Extreme (and the C300 is near) run upwards of 300MB/s, which is a ridiculously fast speed as it is. Most current technology is made around HDDs that do not run at one tenth of that speed. My point is that the extra price of the SATA3 6.0 SSDs likely do not justify the increased cost at this point in time and the near future. For any Benchmark figures, keep in mind that the probability of most software running at those speeds is questionable. As far as brand, I would get a Crucial C300 right now as I have seen some ridiculous sales and it has proven itself to be a great system that is both underrated in speed and longevity (IIRC they have tested one to R/W/RW over 100 terabytes without shrinkage).

****EXAMPLE: Alright!, so my old Vertex 2 made Word load in only 1.3 seconds, but my new Vertex 3 makes Word load in 1.1 seconds. With all this saved time, let's stop for coffee and a doughnut!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back