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

256GB Crucial RealSSD C300 2.5-inch SATA 6GB/s - will it work in Macbook Pro?

Q

qbaser

macrumors member
Original poster
Apr 16, 2011
49
0
Edinburgh
Will this drive work n my Macbook Pro? - 256GB Crucial RealSSD C300 2.5-inch SATA 6GB/s . Also, if it will work, and with it being 6Gbps, will it give me a faster speed than the current 255Mbps I'm getting wit my Vertex 2 (3Gbps) 120 GB SSD?

It's not clear from the Crucial website as I went through their process to identify compatibility, it said they were unable to say if it was! (see below)

http://www.crucial.com/uk/store/lis...tel Core i7 (17-inch DDR3) Early-2011&Cat=SSD

Thanks
Al
 
What MBP do you have? Only the 2011 MBPs have SATA 6Gb/s. Others have SATA 3Gb/s which will limit your speeds. Unless you have 2011 MBP, that Crucial SSD won't improve your performance.
 
Quite right to question its compatibility. Crucial have (somewhat prematurely) pulled Apple off their compatibility list due to issues surrounding the 2011 MBP and Sata III drives, namely the 17inch.

The flakiness surrounding the MBP in question stems from a poorly shielded cable that lies underneath the HDD bay. This doesn't effect the 13 and 15 flavours so you should only be concerned if you have the 17inch - and even then it's so hit and miss if you have a problem with supporting Sata III drives anyway.

So to answer you question; Yes it is compatible and Crucial have possibly taken the wrong path by claiming their drives are incompatible with the whole range.
 
qbaser said:
And so does that mean the 2011 17" MBP are all buggy and will never support Sata 6Gbps?
Click to expand...

http://blog.macsales.com/9754-owc-offers-fix-for-2011-17-mbp-sata-problems

Read that, it explains and offers a fix for the SATA issue found in 17" MBP.

Crucial C300 isn't exactly a fast SSD either so if you want something fast, go with OWC's Mercury 6Gb/s SSD, though to be honest, if you already have Vertex 2, just stick with it. The difference is pretty negligible in normal usage.
 
Hellhammer said:
http://blog.macsales.com/9754-owc-offers-fix-for-2011-17-mbp-sata-problems

Read that, it explains and offers a fix for the SATA issue found in 17" MBP.

Crucial C300 isn't exactly a fast SSD either so if you want something fast, go with OWC's Mercury 6Gb/s SSD, though to be honest, if you already have Vertex 2, just stick with it. The difference is pretty negligible in normal usage.
Click to expand...

Not fast? It was plenty fast in my MBP! The Vertex 3 has edged it but for the price I'd say the C300 is unbeatable.
 
Hellhammer said:
But it's not an upgrade from Vertex 2 by any means.
Click to expand...

Well, not running at 3Gbps it isn't, but at 6Gbps it kicks it's butt.

I have the 17" and I had nothing but trouble trying to get the C300 to work. I even did the cable replacement and finally got it to recognize the drive was here, but it was totally unstable. I finally got a Vertex 3, and it screams! No issues at all. I did replace the cable however, so it could be part of why it's working well I put the C300 in the DVD drive bay. This was before OWC came out with the cable shielding, so I don't know if that would have made a difference. I have the shielding coming, so I might just try it again for fun.
 
Last edited:
phpmaven said:
Well, not running at 3Gbps it isn't, but at 6Gbps it kicks it's butt.
Click to expand...

Not really:

23532.png


23533.png


23544.png


23534.png


23535.png


http://www.anandtech.com/show/3812/the-ssd-diaries-crucials-realssd-c300/3

Crucial wins in reads while loses in writes so the overall performance is about the same. At least I wouldn't consider the Crucial as an upgrade in terms of performance.
 
qbaser said:
Thanks. I'v actually just searched around on google and yes, seems the 17" MBP might not work with the C300!

http://forums.crucial.com/t5/Solid-...k-Pro-2-3ghz-i7-but-not-recognized/td-p/40912

Such a pisser!

Al
Click to expand...

Don not lose faith, I've seen somewhere that covering the SATA Cable with some tin foil to shield it should fix the problem. It may not be the best solution ever for now, but it seems to work.

Else, mount it in the Optibay.

Good luck, mine should arrive possibly tomorrow and I'll install it using the Data Doubler.

MB
 
mbmobile said:
Else, mount it in the Optibay.

Good luck, mine should arrive possibly tomorrow and I'll install it using the Data Doubler.

MB
Click to expand...

Thank for that info. Hmm ye mounting in the optibay sounds a good idea. Im a bit nervous about doing that, not such a techie. The SSD in the normal HDD bay was easy but im guessing the optibay is tougher? Is there a caddy in there that will hold the SSD secure? And is it an easy enough procedure to do?

Thanks again
Al
 
They work ok for me.

I wanted 512 GB pure SSD and these seemed like the best way to do it with what's currently available. Less than $900. A not available Vertex 3 480 (not a 512) is on New Egg for $1900. A couple of not easily gotten 240s is priced there at $1100. Still doesn't meet my desire for 512 GB.

One reports connecting at SATA III and of course the other at SATA II. No problems with that and I think the performance isn't too terrible.

042511.jpg
 
IMO the Crucial and Intel SSDs are the best choices of SATA3 SSDs on the market after evaluating the literature on this forum, provided Crucial is still using 34nm flash memory. If not, the Intel 510 is the way to go. The C300 seems to be a substantially better drive than the Vertex quality wise (look at online reviews to make your own opinion), and it will outlast both the Vertex 3 and OWC drive by about 40%, plus or minus (provided they have not changed up their memory as well). Furthermore, the speed differences of drives running upwards of 250 read and write are probably minimal in true use, but the C300 that uses SATA3 will read substantially faster than the Vertex 2 due to it being a SATA3 v. 2. The Vertex 3 and OWC 6.0 Pro run substantially faster (number wise) than virtually any other drive on the market. With that said, how much of a difference this makes in normal use (vs. other SSDs) is questionable. I would not buy an OWC or an OCZ at this point over even the factory Toshiba/Apple drive until some questions are answered with long term research, but that's just me.
 
C300 has serious compatibility issues with the 2011 MBP as of now. Check out the Crucial forums, there's an almost 20 page post. It's a game of Russian Roulette. If you can get you're SATA III drive working on the MBP, congrats to you. However if you can't, you're stuck in a sticky situation. I went safe and went with the Intel 320; however the 510 is exhibiting the same problems as the C300 due to sharing the same driver/chip.

OCZ/OWC Sata III drives have reported a higher success rate due to firmware updates, but they still have their problems. Not all SATA II drives will work as well. Many have problems. All Intel and Kingston work. Vertex 2 has been reported to have hibernation problems (but it might have been fixed with updates). Just make sure to research. I was completely clueless at first but I've done a crapload of research over the last 2 days.

I went with the Intel 320; similar benchmarks as the C300 at a similar price. Can't beat that! Question is how good the GC is on it...Intel has problems with that.
 
I guess I must have gotten really lucky, then. Both of mine have worked perfectly since I installed them (knock wood). They did both come already at v006 on the firmware, though. Maybe that makes a difference.

I did do a little research before I bought them (really, just a little) and it seemed like every SSD has some sort of reported problem with the MBP but that the C300 had less of them. I guess to a large extent getting any SSD to work with these machines is Russian roulette.
 
Not the ones that they come with that are good SSDs of 34nm flash mem and decent speeds for a SATA2 system...
 
qbaser said:
Thank for that info. Hmm ye mounting in the optibay sounds a good idea. Im a bit nervous about doing that, not such a techie. The SSD in the normal HDD bay was easy but im guessing the optibay is tougher? Is there a caddy in there that will hold the SSD secure? And is it an easy enough procedure to do?

Thanks again
Al
Click to expand...

There are plenty. Personally, I've bought mine from OWC (www.ms sales.com) and is called Data Doubler.

OWC provides even a simple installation video in their web site. Shouldn't be so complex.

At least this is the way I'll proceed as soon the ssd will be delivered.
 
Questions for OP>> I did not see this come up in the thread. You are comparing a 120GB Vertex 2 to a 256GB C300. Are you contemplating that move because you need the extra space or is it primarily for speed?

If you are after more speed, I really doubt there will be a perceptible speed difference in normal usage between the drives.

If you just want more space, I would be leery of using a SATA III drive in the 17" because of all the reported problems. You might have more stability with a SATA II SSD. The Intel 320 seems to be very stable from user reports here. Also Intel offers a boot CDRom ISO for firmware upgrades unlike some other vendors.

I put a Intel 510 SSD in my 2011 13" MBP and it works perfectly, but the with reported cable issues on the 17" this might not be a good choice for you.
 
NickZac said:
IMO the Crucial and Intel SSDs are the best choices of SATA3 SSDs on the market after evaluating the literature on this forum, provided Crucial is still using 34nm flash memory. If not, the Intel 510 is the way to go. The C300 seems to be a substantially better drive than the Vertex quality wise (look at online reviews to make your own opinion), and it will outlast both the Vertex 3 and OWC drive by about 40%, plus or minus (provided they have not changed up their memory as well). Furthermore, the speed differences of drives running upwards of 250 read and write are probably minimal in true use, but the C300 that uses SATA3 will read substantially faster than the Vertex 2 due to it being a SATA3 v. 2. The Vertex 3 and OWC 6.0 Pro run substantially faster (number wise) than virtually any other drive on the market. With that said, how much of a difference this makes in normal use (vs. other SSDs) is questionable. I would not buy an OWC or an OCZ at this point over even the factory Toshiba/Apple drive until some questions are answered with long term research, but that's just me.
Click to expand...

Your NANDs will lose their charge before you reach the 3000 write cycles that 25nm flash offers.

http://www.anandtech.com/show/4159/ocz-vertex-3-pro-preview-the-first-sf2500-ssd/2
 
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