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

Apple (Samsung) 128GB SSD vs. OWC 240GB

JPamplin

JPamplin

macrumors 6502
Original poster
Mar 12, 2009
321
64
Nashville, TN
OK, I've got the 240GB SSD installed in my 2011 MBA now. I thought I'd post the comparison shots of performance that some of you have asked for.

Interestingly, the OWC SSD (which is driven with a SandForce chipset) doesn't support TRIM. Most say it's not needed - I'm wondering if I should enable it or not. For the time being, it's off. Also interestingly, the write speed is not really different - it's the read speed that really shot up due to it being a SATA3 device.

Before:

Read: 259.8 MB/s
Write: 244.5 MB/s

After:

Read: 484.6 MB/s
Write: 263.6 MB/s

Don't notice a huge difference in performance (they were both fast to begin with). But now I have the space to put in a 50-60GB Boot Camp partition, which is a big deal to me. Not sure yet on battery drain, but it does seem a bit warmer than before.

Hope that helps. Question: Has anyone ENABLED TRIM for an OWC SSD, and has it made a difference in any way?
 

Attachments

  • Before.png
    Before.png
    568.8 KB · Views: 190
  • After.png
    After.png
    523.3 KB · Views: 192
Last edited:
That the perceivable difference between the two in most normal scenarios is small doesn't surprise me. I don't notice much of a real-life difference between my Intel x25-M, Intel 510 and the Toshiba SF in my MBA.

I find in hardware forums that most people can agree that sequential read/write speeds doesn't seem to make much of a noticeable impact in regular tasks (unless they're absurdly high/low, of course). Until the disks have enough space to serve as video scratch disks or similar, the sequential speeds feel mostly like a thing for bragging rights.
 
For me personally, sequential read/write doesn't mean much to me since time is on my side and I have a lot of it to waste. My computer is used mainly for entertainment purposes. Having said that, I appreciate random read/write performance more since most of the time the ssd remains pretty idle other than for OSX access.

Enjoy your new found space though, must feel like moving from a condo to single unit housing. :)
 
I had the 3G 180 GB version of the OWC SSD for a 2011 11" Air but would wake up to a stuck screen when resuming from sleep. I would also get delays in waking from sleep, whereas wakeup with the Toshiba SSD would be nearly instant. Of note, I had hibernation disabled with both drives.

Are you encountering any of these issues? Maybe I should exchange this one for another one... :confused:
 
The OWC drives suck too much power. I couldn't stand losing 45 minutes to an hour of battery life, so I put the original ssd back into my mba 2011.
 
OWC is also significantly slower when using FileVault encryption.
 
1. There is a minimal speed increase.
2. The power drain (with OWC 6G blade) is very noticeable in battery life.
3. My OWC SSD failed after less than 6 months of use.
 
Hmm.

I'm noticing less battery life and definitely more heat on the bottom under where the SSD is installed. We'll see.

I might use the 240GB in my Hackintosh if there's too much of an issue. Anyone else have less battery?
 
I assume that the drain is from powering denser or more chips on the board of the SSD, same with the increased heat.

The battery drains faster, but your disk can read and write more data in that time than your original drive could with the longer battery. It's a give and take. More storage/drive speed or longer battery.
 
One silly question from me...

How did you install Mountain Lion when the Rescue Image is on the other SSD? :confused:
 
Remember the Sandforce drive will be faster on compressible data - closer to 400-500MB/s
 
Cloning

You can also clone your system to your new SSD, using Carbon Copy Cloner or Super Duper, than you don't need to reinstall your system.
 
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