anyone bought the Apple-provided SSDs 256 or 500 GB

Discussion in 'MacBook Pro' started by supercaliber, May 17, 2010.

  1. supercaliber macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2007
    #1
    I want to buy a new macbook pro with SSD. I am interested in your impressions, experience, et cetera.

    I know i can save money by doing it myself, but if i get a reasonable experience by just going with Apple, i think its worth the hundred bucks I would save.
     
  2. iamrawr macrumors 6502

    iamrawr

    Joined:
    Apr 16, 2010
    Location:
    New Jersey
    #2
    Apple overprices it. If your comfortable with installing the ssd yourself then it's better to get a third party ssd
     
  3. villager990 macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Sep 26, 2006
    #3
    I decided to pick up a 256GB one.

    My impressions so far are that it's very fast, but that's about all I can say. To be clear, I'm very pleased, but I'm judging it 'phenotypically', if you will, and I'm sort of having a hard time detecting a great difference between it and a regular hard drive.

    One thing that I will add is that I feel much more at ease while carrying it around while it's on - spinning disks at high speeds always kind of used to freak me out to carry because the slightest movement might mess them up.

    I did think at the time of adding the SSD that it would really help my battery life, but I have yet to be impressed by the battery life (as so many other users here have said). Perhaps it's because I had a two week fling with an iPad which lasts for a solid 11 hours...

    If you're worrying about cost, you may want to think twice before adding it. For me, the Lord has been good enough to make cost not such a big consideration, so I added it on, and I'm glad I did.
     
  4. piwi macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2006
    #4
    :eek::eek::eek::eek::eek::eek:
     
  5. alphaod macrumors Core

    alphaod

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2008
    Location:
    NYC
    #5
    For the price of the 256GB SSD offered by Apple, I'd consider the OWC Mecury Extreme 200GB SSD instead.
     
  6. Xyp macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2010
    #6
    Mbp 256 Ssd

    My specs are below. I don't have know about my SSD to as far as real world numbers after degradation, etc... but I can tell you that the 256 SSD that came installed in my MBP is screeeeaming fast: from the push of the power button to a completed boot in... wait for it... 20 seconds. I've timed it on multiple occasions now... but, that is a characteristic of ALL SSDs (excellent speed when new). The question is how it will perform after the whole drive has been written to, when the firmware and controller installed in that particular drive have to delegate RE-writing those blocks of memory. The drives that Mac uses inside it's MBPs have historically not gotten great marks for this, but on the whole are still faster than even a 7200 rpm HDD after degradation.

    As far as cost vs. time to install the drive (+shipping and +wait time if you're going to order your OEM SSD online), the math is much closer than it seems to be for the 128 and 256 gig drives installed by Apple. I think my cost comparison had Mac charging me about $50 (USD) more for their drive than a smaller one (200 gig) that I could have ordered from OCZ, which is the only other SSD manufacturer that I would have bought one from. And I didn't have to install it myself, an action which doesn't void your warranty but DOES expose the inner workings of your new expensive laptop to slip-ups / damage, etc. Additionally, I didn't have to wait longer to use my computer (waiting for a new drive to arrive in mail / reinstalling OSX, etc.).

    Anyway, the moral of the story is that I am happy with my decision to take the plunge on the Mac 256 SSD. I'm trying to be a little judicious about what I save to my internal drive, i.e. using my external a little more often, but so far it's been all good.

    Hope this helps.
     
  7. ExcelonGT macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2008
    #7
    I'll let the numbers speak for themselves. I read too many problems with firmware on the aftermarket SSDs.

    Disk Test 313.04
    Sequential 218.46
    Uncached Write 342.49 210.29 MB/sec [4K blocks]
    Uncached Write 325.73 184.30 MB/sec [256K blocks]
    Uncached Read 103.88 30.40 MB/sec [4K blocks]
    Uncached Read 371.22 186.57 MB/sec [256K blocks]
    Random 552.03
    Uncached Write 323.24 34.22 MB/sec [4K blocks]
    Uncached Write 465.37 148.98 MB/sec [256K blocks]
    Uncached Read 1940.79 13.75 MB/sec [4K blocks]
    Uncached Read 671.92 124.68 MB/sec [256K blocks]
     
  8. supercaliber thread starter macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2007
    #8

    So that implies that if i never fill the drive i don't have to worry, correct???

    I have had my current mbp for four years and I haven't filled it up yet
     
  9. piwi macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2006
    #9
    Correct, but you have to have a consequent amount of free space (ie 2GB are not going to be enough)
    Note that not filling it up will not alleviate the cell wearing issue that's caused by OS X's lack of TRIM support but that is more of a life expectancy issue rather than a speed issue.

    --edit: to be totally complete and to offset the lack of TRIM, one can back up, format and reinstall his OS via the backup every now and then to restore the drive's original performance. Another option for Intel SSDs is to use the Windows based utility to safe erase the disk and then reinstall the OSes either from a backup or from scratch.
     
  10. Pressure macrumors 68040

    Pressure

    Joined:
    May 30, 2006
    Location:
    Denmark
    #10
    I am using the Intel Solid State Disk, which so far has enough space for my mobile needs.
     
  11. Bradan macrumors member

    Joined:
    May 6, 2010
    #11
    phenotype and lord in the same sentence:p

    o jeez.
     
  12. Bosmonster macrumors member

    Joined:
    May 17, 2010
    #12
    20 seconds? You've been ripped off.

    With Intel SSD I do a full boot in about half that.
     
  13. Ryanhdd macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Nov 1, 2007
    Location:
    Virginia Beach, Virginia
    #13
    i must say i had the 500 ssd for like 3 weeks. I am now waiting for a whole new machine because My new one died after 3 weeks. Safari kept kernal paniking and then mail and then the whole machine. tried to restart and nothing. got out disc and did repair. repair fails and then i try to reformat and install, that would not work. i called apple and they are sending another one now. So for the time being i have a really $$$$ paper weight. My thoughts on my 3 weeks of using it. Its ok. but i should have stuck with the 7200 500g. Oh well. technology is just not there yet. its not reliable. I have another mbp abnout 4 yrs old and never had a single problem.
     
  14. Bosmonster macrumors member

    Joined:
    May 17, 2010
    #14
    SSD's are more reliable than mechanical HD's, especially in laptops.

    You just got unlucky.
     
  15. supercaliber thread starter macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2007
    #15
    Uggh,

    I so want the 500 GB SSD. I need 500 GB and I need the performance.

    Your story is disheartening.

    Anyone with a good experience with a 500 GB SSD?
     
  16. toffa813 macrumors regular

    Joined:
    May 10, 2007
    Location:
    ATX
    #16
    20 seconds? bah! I did a boot the other day on my MBP (sig) and did it in under 30 I think... and I spent $45 to add it on

    Still want to add an SSD at some point though...
     
  17. NovemberWhiskey macrumors 68030

    NovemberWhiskey

    Joined:
    May 18, 2009
    #17
    You do a boot in 10 seconds? Seriously?

    I have an Intel X25 M 80 Gb and I booted at 30 s when freshly installed, and at 33s now.

    Are you starting timing when you push the power button?
     
  18. supercaliber thread starter macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2007
    #18
    anyone have any timing specs on starting VMWare Windows in OSX
     
  19. killerbee79 macrumors member

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2008
    Location:
    Wisconsin
    #19
    Actually you are incorrect. Just because you haven't filled up the SSD with saved data doesn't mean the SSD isn't full. You see the wear leveling algorithms use that free space to do their thing.

    Lets say you have a 128 GB SSD. After formatting it that leaves you with 119 GB of space to use roughly. Now you fill it with 50 GB of stuff. As you use your computer there are reads and writes happening all the time. So the free 69 GB is being used with the wear leveling algorithm to do that. That is the whole point of wear leveling, to use every cell in the flash so the drive doesn't wear out fast. So EVERYONE will have a filled up SSD at some point. Depending on how heavy of a user you are and how full of your data it is will determine how fast you fill up your drive.
     
  20. abnospam macrumors regular

    abnospam

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2008
    #20
    how is that? I have one too am at 20 seconds. Please share the secret.
     
  21. abnospam macrumors regular

    abnospam

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2008
    #21
    after vmware is in active memory, it takes ~ 4 seconds to suspend and/or resume on XP, VMWare 3.1
     
  22. JerseyBill macrumors member

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2010
    #22
    Raises hand...

    I have had my new 17" i7 MBP (8 GB memory and Apple 512 GB SSD) for almost two months now and I keep crossing my fingers because I have not had one problem - and the performance is nothing short of amazing compared to prior PC systems. My boot-up time from finger to real work is 22 seconds with the SSD.

    I have partitioned the drive with Bootcamp so that I can run a full Windows 7 system - because I own a license to Photoshop CS5 for PC only and because I wanted Sony Vegas available on this machine. I have also put my full massive iTunes library on the OSX side - so now I have about 100 GB availalable on each of the two partitions (over 400 GB used). I have Aperture on the OS X side and Lightroom 3 on both sides.

    I have not been moderating my writing and erasing activities at all (have written and erased well over 100 or more GB on the OS X side if not a lot more) and the performance still seems blazingly faster than any hard drive in my experience. Frankly I am not that concerned with degradation so long as the speed stays well above any hard drive. The real advantage for me is the lack of "crashability" (that I have experienced too many times) in addition to the speed.

    I feel a little sheepish here because I have no blown pixels, no yellow screen, no SSD problems - really nothing to complain about at all... Just a very nice MBP that has surpassed my expectations, even given what I spent for the unit. Incidentally, I used a corporate discount - which got the SSD incremental cost down to somewhere between $1000 and $1100, which I don't think is THAT far beyond comparative option prices I have seen out there (claimed performance differences aside) for a 500 GB unit.

    JB
     
  23. FuNGi macrumors 65816

    FuNGi

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2010
    Location:
    California
    #23
    ^ Hah. I noticed that too. Sounds philosophically at odds assuming the OP was using the biological use of phenotype as the outward expression of genotype. However, I guess this doesn't have to imply natural selection as the driver of change.
     
  24. roxygal9 macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2010
    Location:
    Orlando
    #24
    :apple:
    I have the 13 in. MBP w/ Apple Toshiba 256 SSD, timing it from powering on to boot up is about 15 seconds.

    I do not have VMWare but I do have Parallels, running Win7. The app itself opens within seconds, and the actual Win7 OS boots up in less than 30 seconds.

    Also opening Office 2008 opens in about 3-4 seconds, while the other apps open in 1-2 seconds.

    I have no complaints with the battery life, I can easily get over 9 hours browsing, word processing, etc. I absolutely love the SSD drive, and though it isnt the fastest one on the market, there was a review done on it, in which it proved to be a very durable drive. :apple:
     
  25. supercaliber thread starter macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2007
    #25
    Considering that just a few years ago any reasonable laptop cost north of 3k , and I easily justified that expense, 1k for a major productivity improvement sounds like a bargain.
     

Share This Page