2011 MacBook Pro 15 @ 2.3 GHz w/ 16 GB RAM and Crucial M4 SSD Benchmarks

[NickZac]

If anyone is interested I took a few action snaps. I am pretty happy overall. Does this look about right to you guys?

2011 MacBook Pro 8,2 w/
-2.3 GHz Quad Core CPU
-16 GB Crucial RAM @ 1333 MHz
-256 GB Crucial M4 SSD (6.0 Gbps)
-1024 MB AMD Radeon HD 6750M GPU
-Hi-Res Display

 

[Spink10]

Yup looks right!

 

[alphaod]

I'm not sure your question is entirely legitimate.

Let's brag about my computer specs and then post a bunch of benchmarks to bolster it.

 

[skasol]

If anyone is interested I took a few action snaps. I am pretty happy overall. Does this look about right to you guys?

2011 MacBook Pro 8,2 w/
-2.3 GHz Quad Core CPU
-16 GB Crucial RAM @ 1333 MHz
-256 GB Crucial M4 SSD (6.0 Gbps)
-1024 MB AMD Radeon HD 6750M GPU
-Hi-Res Display

What software did u use to test the hardware? Including harddrive.

Thank u.

 

[hotgrease]

That thing must scream.

 

[szarkupacka]

What software did u use to test the hardware? Including harddrive.

Thank u.

Test for HDD: Blackmagic Disk Speed Test (for MAC App Store)
Test for Hardware: GeekBench 2.2.7

 

[skasol]

Test for HDD: Blackmagic Disk Speed Test (for MAC App Store)
Test for Hardware: GeekBench 2.2.7

Nice scores. Which crucial memory and ssd did u buy? Care to share a link? Any issues?

 

[BlackbookGuy]

What do you use this computer for that such high scores benefit you? Especially curious about needing so much ram.

 

[mscice]

really looks nice stats... can't believe how much a ssd can do ...

 

[IngerMan]

You do have a fast machine but the reality is:

Your stock machine scores 10,275. Your upgrades netted you 159 points on GeekBench chart, which is a 1.2% improvement from stock

I don't think Geekbench shows the true benefit of SSD vs HD.

I have the early MBP 15" 2.0. I did 8GB ram upgrade and the 256 M4 SSD. My results in 32 bit mode netted me 168 points and in 64 bit mode 190 points. 1.2%.

So yes, it looks right using the GeekBench tool.

 

[Bluedog54]

If anyone is interested I took a few action snaps. I am pretty happy overall. Does this look about right to you guys?

2011 MacBook Pro 8,2 w/
-2.3 GHz Quad Core CPU
-16 GB Crucial RAM @ 1333 MHz
-256 GB Crucial M4 SSD (6.0 Gbps)
-1024 MB AMD Radeon HD 6750M GPU
-Hi-Res Display

I have the same machine with a Crucial M4 128 SSD, and will test only a 190 write speed versus your 200+ speed with the 256 Crucial M4 using the Blackmagic disk speed test.

 

[IngerMan]

I have the same machine with a Crucial M4 128 SSD, and will test only a 190 write speed versus your 200+ speed with the 256 Crucial M4 using the Blackmagic disk speed test.

That is because the 128GB is rated at 175 write speed vs the 256 is rated at 250 write speed. It is listed on the specs at Crucial.com and probably were you bought it from.

 

[negativzero]

I believe geekbench does not do any testing for the hard drives. IIRC, I got almost similar scores with the SSD and HDD.

Anyone care to confirm this?

 

[shortcut3d]

Geekbench tests the processor and memory architecture. The SSD or quantity of memory are only reflected if you do not have enough base memory to begin with. Therefore a machine like the base 2011 Mac mini with 2GB of RAM would see gains, especially in the 64-bit test, when increase memory or changing to an SSD. Moving to faster memory such as the Kingston Hyper X PnP 1600MHz or 1866MHz would increase Geekbench scores.

 

[NickZac]

I'm not sure your question is entirely legitimate.

Let's brag about my computer specs and then post a bunch of benchmarks to bolster it.

It's reasons like this why I am hesitant to visit this forum much. I said I was "happy". I was curious as to if other 16 GB users with the M4 or similar SSDs got the same numbers. I appreciate your response but your hostility is unnecessary. If you have a problem or reservations regarding my posts, then handle it via a PM.

----------

What do you use this computer for that such high scores benefit you? Especially curious about needing so much ram.

Large statistical analysis using SPSS, Access, SAS, SQL, and (soon) Stata and TELEform Designer, which is a known memory hog. The data-sets I used can have literally millions of unique entries.

You do have a fast machine but the reality is:

Your stock machine scores 10,275. Your upgrades netted you 159 points on GeekBench chart, which is a 1.2% improvement from stock

I don't think Geekbench shows the true benefit of SSD vs HD.

I have the early MBP 15" 2.0. I did 8GB ram upgrade and the 256 M4 SSD. My results in 32 bit mode netted me 168 points and in 64 bit mode 190 points. 1.2%.

So yes, it looks right using the GeekBench tool.

Which was the reason I posted this originally to make sure all looked right. It def doesn't show the benefit when I have all my normal programs open.

 

[ThoseGuys]

I love when someone questions why a person might need so much ram, only for the person to come back and give a knock it out of the park explanation. I have 8gb now and could easily benefit from 16gb. Pro Tools 9 running several mastering plugins and sampled instruments will eat my 8gb in no time.

 

[throAU]

What do you use this computer for that such high scores benefit you? Especially curious about needing so much ram.

Given 16gb of ram is about 150 bucks these days, why wouldn't you spend the small amount of extra cash on RAM? If 16gb was that price a few months ago when I upgraded my 15", i would have gone straight to 16gb no questions asked. Plenty of stuff will use it, for me the big hog is VMware.

Even if it is not used, it will help with disk cache...

 

[alphaod]

It's reasons like this why I am hesitant to visit this forum much. I said I was "happy". I was curious as to if other 16 GB users with the M4 or similar SSDs got the same numbers. I appreciate your response but your hostility is unnecessary. If you have a problem or reservations regarding my posts, then handle it via a PM.

Telling you something like in a PM is too personal. There is nothing personal about my comment. It's just my opinion that this looks like bragging. It's what I would do if I wanted to show off my computer, car, etc.

 

[surjavarman]

I get way lower read and write speeds with the exact same crucial m4 256gb ssd.

My speeds are around 150/400. How are you getting 250/500?

 

[thekev]

It's reasons like this why I am hesitant to visit this forum much. I said I was "happy". I was curious as to if other 16 GB users with the M4 or similar SSDs got the same numbers. I appreciate your response but your hostility is unnecessary. If you have a problem or reservations regarding my posts, then handle it via a PM.

I don't understand the hostility either. Ram doesn't seem to add a lot to benchmarks. It doesn't really so much speed up your computer as it helps prevent slowing when addressing large amounts of data. I mean I don't think those aspects had a huge effect on your benchmarks especially compared to the potential real benefit.

I love when someone questions why a person might need so much ram, only for the person to come back and give a knock it out of the park explanation. I have 8gb now and could easily benefit from 16gb. Pro Tools 9 running several mastering plugins and sampled instruments will eat my 8gb in no time.

Some people just do not understand it. There's quite a difference between absolute requirements and amounts that might benefit you. Having plenty of ram allows you to be less concerned about settings and practices that are ram intensive without heavy use of swap files. Some people can benefit from massive quantities of ram without the 32 bit application bottleneck.

 

[IngerMan]

I get way lower read and write speeds with the exact same crucial m4 256gb ssd.

My speeds are around 150/400. How are you getting 250/500?

Is your SDD in the HD bay? What model computer do you have? You should be seeing 250/480's for Sata III speeds.

 

[lamboman]

I get way lower read and write speeds with the exact same crucial m4 256gb ssd.

My speeds are around 150/400. How are you getting 250/500?

As IngerMan says. Something definitely isn't right with your speeds though, my 128GB is getting a consistent 190+/509+ write/read speed.

Unless you have been doing loads of heavy reads and writes where garbage collection hasn't managed your deleted items properly, that shouldn't be happening.

If your SSD is in the HD bay, just start fresh

 

[NickZac]

Telling you something like in a PM is too personal. There is nothing personal about my comment. It's just my opinion that this looks like bragging. It's what I would do if I wanted to show off my computer, car, etc.

Your comment was unprofessional as you took it upon yourself to (incorrectly) translate my post. You added nothing to this thread of any educational value and presented personal criticism regarding my character. If you find that telling me something like that via a PM is too personal, then that should say something about the personal nature of the comment that you made.

If this is supposed to be an informative site, the only thing you are doing is discouraging the dissemination of information. For some reason this is common on this forum, which is a shame given how knowledgable so many members are. You probably know a ton more about computers than me, but knowing a ton about computers doesn't do much if you cannot effectively and positively communicate with others.

 

[surjavarman]

Is your SDD in the HD bay? What model computer do you have? You should be seeing 250/480's for Sata III speeds.

My sdd is IN the hd bay. System report even says that I am getting 6gigabit speeds.

How can I solve this and get the maximum performance out of my ssd? Btw trim support is disabled.

 

[IngerMan]

My sdd is IN the hd bay. System report even says that I am getting 6gigabit speeds.

How can I solve this and get the maximum performance out of my ssd? Btw trim support is disabled.

Have you had it in for a bit? Or done a lot of transferring of data? Did you test it when you first put it in to see what the read write speeds are?

If it was me, I would follow the enable trim support 2.1

Basically install the Trim Support Enable 2.1, reboot and use the command to erase all free space so it puts you back to new condition. Then test out your speeds and please report back to us.

It's pretty easy, go to the thread I made and read the entire thread "My Crucial M4 likes Trim Support"