2011 MBP Stock SSD SATAIII?

[kjos8035]

Hey guys,

I ordered a 17" MBP with a 512gb SSD last week. I'm curious after reading every one talking about SataIII drives being up to twice as fast, whether the SSD's being installed by apple are SataII or 3? Is it worth canceling my order and waiting to buy and install an aftermarket drive later than is SataIII?



Thanks

 

[Tyrion]

It's almost definitely not a SATA-III drive (those are only just coming to market and aren't made by the manufacturers Apple usually source SSDs from), and I don't really think it's good value for money anyway.

 

[kjos8035]

It's almost definitely not a SATA-III drive (those are only just coming to market and aren't made by the manufacturers Apple usually source SSDs from), and I don't really think it's good value for money anyway.

Does the new 2011 hardware support sataIII, and is it worth waiting for over a sataII drive?

 

[Jaimi]

One thing you might want to consider is that the new OS (Lion) only supports TRIM for apple SSD's. This might change, but then again, it might not.

 

[simsaladimbamba]

S-ATA 6.0Gb/s (also known as S-ATA III) is only an interface, which allows for transfers of up to 600MB/s. S-ATA 3.0Gb/s (S-ATA II) offers roughly 300MB/s, therefore most SSDs will work fine with that. The SSD used by Apple probably is as fast as S-ATA 3.0Gb/s provides.

Does the new 2011 hardware support sataIII, and is it worth waiting for over a sataII drive?

Yes, and maybe.

 

[dnenciu]

Hey guys,

I ordered a 17" MBP with a 512gb SSD last week. I'm curious after reading every one talking about SataIII drives being up to twice as fast, whether the SSD's being installed by apple are SataII or 3? Is it worth canceling my order and waiting to buy and install an aftermarket drive later than is SataIII?



Thanks

There are two things you have to realize.

First is the performance gains from a mid range ssd vs a high end in normal use are questionable.

Yes they show up in benchmarks. But in most cases they will not show in normal use except if the ssd that apple provides is really low grade.

Second most third party ssds have issues in macs: intel x25-m, Vertex 2, OWC... just do a search for some threads and you will see.

So yes you might get a faster drive but at the cost of stability.

Also if you ever have to send it in for repairs you would have to put back the old drive or risk voiding the warranty.

And yes for some people the third party ssds work just fine but for others:
https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/1057025/

So the question is more are you looking to squeeze the last ounce of performance out of the machine or want a stable machine that you don't have to worry about?

Personally I want a stable machine that does the job and I don't have to worry about. If not I would buy a PC like the hp envy that would cost me $600 less for the same spec.

 

[kjos8035]

There are two things you have to realize.

First is the performance gains from a mid range ssd vs a high end in normal use are questionable.

Yes they show up in benchmarks. But in most cases they will not show in normal use except if the ssd that apple provides is really low grade.

Second most third party ssds have issues in macs: intel x25-m, Vertex 2, OWC... just do a search for some threads and you will see.

So yes you might get a faster drive but at the cost of stability.

Also if you ever have to send it in for repairs you would have to put back the old drive or risk voiding the warranty.

And yes for some people the third party ssds work just fine but for others:
https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/1057025/

So the question is more are you looking to squeeze the last ounce of performance out of the machine or want a stable machine that you don't have to worry about?

Personally I want a stable machine that does the job and I don't have to worry about. If not I would buy a PC like the hp envy that would cost me $600 less for the same spec.

Solid response is solid. That's something I've been reading about for the past few hours. The new intel ssd510 and the vertex3 coming out... the only thing that remains is how well it will work with the macs, ultimately. Guess I'd rather pay $900 for an SSD from Apple that will be fast as hell and be compatible and under warranty than $1,300 for something that is more questionable.

 

[Weaselboy]

Does the new 2011 hardware support sataIII, and is it worth waiting for over a sataII drive?

Yes the 2011 MBPs support SATAIII and I think it is worth waiting for. From the early tests we have seen the new SATAIII drives like the Sandforce SF-2000 chipset drives (OCZ Vertex 3 for example) are benchmarking at about twice the speed and for the same price as today's SATAII drives. At this point I don't see why you would not want to wait and see how the SATAIII drives shake out.

 

[kjos8035]

Yes the 2011 MBPs support SATAIII and I think it is worth waiting for. From the early tests we have seen the new SATAIII drives like the Sandforce SF-2000 chipset drives (OCZ Vertex 3 for example) are benchmarking at about twice the speed and for the same price as today's SATAII drives. At this point I don't see why you would not want to wait and see how the SATAIII drives shake out.

Toss out reliability, warranty, etc, and go for faster benches?

 

[Weaselboy]

Toss out reliability, warranty, etc, and go for faster benches?

1. Reliability> There has been a small subset of Macbook owners that have had sleep troubles with their aftermarket SSDs. If you buy a SSD from a reputable manufacturer (I like OWC) and you have problems call them and send it back then pop your old drive back in. No money lost, so what's the risk. I have not seen one report of data loss from an aftermarket SSD, only the wake from sleep problems with some SSD/Macbook combinations.

2. Warranty> Installing an aftermarket SSD has no impact on your Macbook's warranty and the drive itself is under warranty from whoever you buy it from.

3. Faster benches> The new SATA III drive are benching twice as fast as current SATA II drives. While I agree it won't result in day to day operations being twice as fast, say starting Photoshop, that kind if performance jump has got to result in a noticeable difference one would think.

My point is if one if looking at an aftermarket SSD it makes sense to wait a week or two for the SATA III drives which at this point are priced the same as SATA II drives. You seem to want to twist what I said to support your position. If you don't want to be bothered with buying/installing ann aftermarket SSD, then don't do it... but there is a valid argument for installing your own aftermarket.

 

[dnenciu]

Yes the 2011 MBPs support SATAIII and I think it is worth waiting for. From the early tests we have seen the new SATAIII drives like the Sandforce SF-2000 chipset drives (OCZ Vertex 3 for example) are benchmarking at about twice the speed and for the same price as today's SATAII drives. At this point I don't see why you would not want to wait and see how the SATAIII drives shake out.

You will have to wait a while. Both Intel and OCZ had issues with the current generation when they were first release (intel pulled the drives off the market, OCZ had multiple revisions of the firmware to get it half right). So personally I would not buy the SATA III ssds right away when they come out and in that case you will have to wait 6m after the release and availability to be able to reliably use one, and even then Apple might not support trim for them in Lion and they might have issues with apple hardware. But I guess if you want to be on the cutting edge...

Don't get me wrong I used to be on the cutting edge myself but I realized that I was more of a beta tester and instead of getting payed for it I was the one paying.

Oh and also: Vertex 2 has problems with the passing from 32nm to 25nm there is no guarantee that they wont use the same flash in Vertex 3 and Intel is not using their own controller chip in the G3 so it might not have the same reliability as G2.

 

[Weaselboy]

You will have to wait a while both Intel and OCZ had issues with the current generation when they were first release (intel pull the drives off the market, OCZ had multiple revisions of the firmware to get it half right). So personally I would not buy the SATA III ssds right away when they come out and in that case you will have to wait 6m after the release and availability to be able to reliably use one, and even then Apple might not support trim for them in Lion and they might have issues with apple hardware. But I guess if you want be on the cutting edge...

Don't get me wrong I used to be on the cutting edge myself but I realized that I was more of a beta tester and instead of getting payed for it I was the one paying.

Oh and also: Vertex 2 has problems with the passing from 32nm to 25nm there is no guarantee that they wont use the same flash in Vertex 3 and Intel is not using their own controller chip in the G3 so it might not have the same reliability as G2.

I agree OCZ has shown themselves to be a sleaze of a company and I would not buy anything from them. OWC is coming out with a SF-2000 SSD and that would be the one I would be interested in.

Reread my last sentence. I said I thought it would be worth it to wait and see how the SATA III SSDs shake out.

 

[RainCityMacFan]

I am looking forward to what OWC has to put out as well ^^

But the issues with hibernation (not sleep) results from people not putting their SSD into their Hard drive bay, which is understandable since many will do a HDD+SSD combination. Naturally in this configuration, you should put the HDD in the hard drive bay because of the sudden motion sensor and SSD into the optical bay drive. Problem is that (from what I have read on this forum) when your Mac comes out of hibernation, it naturally looks to the drive in the first HDD rather than the Optical bay. Another problem with this configuration is that we aren't sure if the optical bay is SATA III or not...

If you choose not to do with the config mentioned above, just wait

 

[dnenciu]

I am looking forward to what OWC has to put out as well ^^

But the issues with hibernation (not sleep) results from people not putting their SSD into their Hard drive bay, which is understandable since many will do a HDD+SSD combination. Naturally in this configuration, you should put the HDD in the hard drive bay because of the sudden motion sensor and SSD into the optical bay drive. Problem is that (from what I have read on this forum) when your Mac comes out of hibernation, it naturally looks to the drive in the first HDD rather than the Optical bay. Another problem with this configuration is that we aren't sure if the optical bay is SATA III or not...

If you choose not to do with the config mentioned above, just wait

Actually it happens to people that have just one drive not only the ones that replace the OD