Another SSD question!

Discussion in 'MacBook Pro' started by itsthetouch, Aug 13, 2011.

  1. itsthetouch macrumors member

    Jan 20, 2008
    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??

  2. Prodo123 macrumors 68020


    Nov 18, 2010
    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
  3. itsthetouch thread starter macrumors member

    Jan 20, 2008
    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?
  4. Prodo123 macrumors 68020


    Nov 18, 2010
    As comparison,
    Your hard drive = 100MB/s at best

    You will notice an extreme performance boost with ANY of these drives. :)
  5. Weaselboy Moderator


    Staff Member

    Jan 23, 2005
    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.
  6. 2hvy4grvty macrumors 6502

    Jun 17, 2011
    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.
  7. hooneyrob macrumors member

    Jul 29, 2011
    United Kingdom
    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..
  8. JronMasteR macrumors 6502


    May 4, 2011
    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
    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.
  9. 2hvy4grvty, Aug 13, 2011
    Last edited: Aug 13, 2011

    2hvy4grvty macrumors 6502

    Jun 17, 2011
    "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).

    Compare with Samsung's 3%.

    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.
  10. itsthetouch thread starter macrumors member

    Jan 20, 2008
    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.
  11. tatical macrumors member

    Jun 7, 2009
    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
  12. JronMasteR macrumors 6502


    May 4, 2011
    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.
  13. 2hvy4grvty macrumors 6502

    Jun 17, 2011
    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.

Share This Page