Another SSD question!

[itsthetouch]

Just ordered a 17" MBP and was thinking of upgrading the hd with a SSD. But really don't know much about it.

I plan to do a lot of video editing, photoshop, all that kind of stuff. Figured a 128gb would be a good way to go, is the Samsung 470 a wise choice? Would I even really notice any difference with this upgrade??

Thanks!

 

[Prodo123]

Samsung SSDs are slow when compared to the competition. The Mercury series from OWC or OCZ Vertex 3 gets much higher speeds.

Samsung = 350MB/s R/W
Mercury 6G = 530MB/s R/W
Vertex 3 = Same as Mercury

 

[itsthetouch]

Samsung SSDs are slow when compared to the competition. The Mercury series from OWC or OCZ Vertex 3 gets much higher speeds.

Samsung = 350MB/s R/W
Mercury 6G = 530MB/s R/W
Vertex 3 = Same as Mercury

Thanks for the response.

I mentioned the Samsung just because it's more in my price range. But still appreciate the advice.

Would it sitll be a smart upgrade from the stock hard drive to one of these? Will I notice it with the Samsung or would it have to be the other 2 to really notice the difference?

 

[Prodo123]

Thanks for the response.

I mentioned the Samsung just because it's more in my price range. But still appreciate the advice.

Would it sitll be a smart upgrade from the stock hard drive to one of these? Will I notice it with the Samsung or would it have to be the other 2 to really notice the difference?

As comparison,
Your hard drive = 100MB/s at best

You will notice an extreme performance boost with ANY of these drives.

 

[Weaselboy]

Samsung SSDs are slow when compared to the competition. The Mercury series from OWC or OCZ Vertex 3 gets much higher speeds.

Samsung = 350MB/s R/W
Mercury 6G = 530MB/s R/W
Vertex 3 = Same as Mercury

Do not buy either of the last two drives listed because they are SATA III drives. The SATA drive connection in the 17" MBP has known compatibility issues with SATA III drives. Stick with a SATA II drive like the Samsung 470 you mentioned for reliable operation. You will give up some speed compared to the SATA III drives, but at least it will work properly. Even an average SSD will be far faster than the HDD you have now and is a nice upgrade.

 

[2hvy4grvty]

Samsung SSDs are slow when compared to the competition. The Mercury series from OWC or OCZ Vertex 3 gets much higher speeds.

Samsung = 350MB/s R/W
Mercury 6G = 530MB/s R/W
Vertex 3 = Same as Mercury

You forgot to mention reliability. Vertex 3 and Murcury 6G (based on the same controller) both have extremely poor reliability. Samsung, on the other hand, has tried and true quality. Samsung is a superior drive by every account.

http://forum.notebookreview.com/sol...e-ssd-reliability-research-3.html#post7766184

http://darkstone.tweakblogs.net/blog/6956/ssd-betrouwbaarheidsonderzoek-de-resultaten.html

http://forum.notebookreview.com/sol...tomer-reviews-current-ssds-who-will-help.html

 

[hooneyrob]

Replying on a 2.2 MBP with 128GB SSD, it's worth it.. Right now I'm uploading a video to Vimeo - the fans are kicking in like a jet taking off but.. in normal use it's so quiet compared to a machine with hard drive. The speed difference is noticeable for sure. File access is lots quicker from booting the machine to accessing apps - everything feels much more instant.

So, yeah, it's worth it.. The negative is the small amount of space but external hard drive's are cheap and iCloud is just around the corner..

 

[JronMasteR]

You forgot to mention reliability. Vertex 3 and Murcury 6G (based on the same controller) both have extremely poor reliability. Samsung, on the other hand, has tried and true quality. Samsung is a superior drive by every account.

The comparisons you've postet don't show anything about the "extremely poor reliability" of the OWC 6G or Vertex 3. The new SF-2200 controller is very reliable. The reviews of these drives are very good.

Only the old SF-1200 drives (Vertex 2 etc.) have bad reviews.

For example:
OCZ Vertex 3 120GB
Newegg Vertex 3 120GB
40 reviews
2 failures

Samsung 470 128GB
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...-063-_-Product
41 reviews
1 failure

Reviews of these to drives are pretty much the same. And the Vertex 3 twice as fast in a 2011 MBP.

 

[2hvy4grvty]

"Very" reliable? That's definitely a stretch. The SF controllers simply aren't in the same league as the "slower" Marvell/what have yous. The new SF drives are still pushing 15%+ failure rate from general surveys, could be even higher if you include RMAs.

Newegg's vertex is pushing 30%+ (all 1 and 2 star reviews; a couple of 3 star reviews).

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produ...rue&Keywords=(keywords)&Page=1#scrollFullInfo

Compare with Samsung's 3%.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produ...rue&Keywords=(keywords)&Page=1#scrollFullInfo

Sandforce drives are quick, I'll give you that. Reliable? No. Even if they were able to quality control that down to 15%, that's still worrisome. It's the hard drive, probably the single most important component in a laptop. So is the speed improvement even noticeable on an every day basis? No, not really. Access times + 4k writes are the two most important factors when determining SSD "snappiness". Samsung's aren't exactly slow in that respect.

Sequential read/writes are almost completely useless, unless you use Crystaldisk as your background or something.

 

[itsthetouch]

Appreciate all the feedback!

Now just have to figure out what to do with the empty hard drive i'll be replacing. Seems kind of a waste.

 

[tatical]

Samsung just announced a 6 Gbps SSD the other day & is reportedly shipping already, but only to OEMs for now (no retail model yet so you'll have to shop ebay). I still use an 'old' PM800 256GB SSD. My MBP boots in 15 seconds with Lion & evertyhing else loads instantly, its fast enough for me so I skipped the Samsung 470 (aka PM810).

Samsung PM830:
Read: 500MB/s
Write: 350MB/s
Supports 256-bit AES encryption

 

[JronMasteR]

"Very" reliable? That's definitely a stretch. The SF controllers simply aren't in the same league as the "slower" Marvell/what have yous. The new SF drives are still pushing 15%+ failure rate from general surveys, could be even higher if you include RMAs.

Newegg's vertex is pushing 30%+ (all 1 and 2 star reviews; a couple of 3 star reviews).

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produ...rue&Keywords=(keywords)&Page=1#scrollFullInfo

Compare with Samsung's 3%.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produ...rue&Keywords=(keywords)&Page=1#scrollFullInfo

Sandforce drives are quick, I'll give you that. Reliable? No. Even if they were able to quality control that down to 15%, that's still worrisome. It's the hard drive, probably the single most important component in a laptop. So is the speed improvement even noticeable on an every day basis? No, not really. Access times + 4k writes are the two most important factors when determining SSD "snappiness". Samsung's aren't exactly slow in that respect.

Sequential read/writes are almost completely useless, unless you use Crystaldisk as your background or something.

I've read many of the reviews on newegg. Most of the bad reviews are because of the bad firmware and the bad compatibility on Windows computers. I'm convinced that the Vertex 3 is reliable in Mac's.
Another point is, all SATA 3 drives have/had problems, because of firmware issues. OCZ is by far not the only one.
I agree, the samsung SSD''s are the most reliable ones out there, I have also recommended it to a friend.

 

[2hvy4grvty]

Crucial and Intel (apart from the 8mb bug) have been relatively immune to the SATA III "newness" bug. Crucial after 002 is rock solid, even on Macs. Intel's falling a bit behind; the 320 is a poor successor to the legendary X-25s so far.