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

Apple SSD vs 3rd Party

S

Seraphex

macrumors member
Original poster
Jun 16, 2009
31
0
So..

What's better the SSD that comes as an upgrade option (only £70) vs the 3rd party SSD's that are significantly more expensive?

Sounds like the apple SSD is slower than 3rd party ones but significantly quicker than the stock 5400/7200RPM drives.

Is the extra £70 worth the performance upgrade? Or is it worth shelling out extra for a 3rd party one.

Also I asked in the apple store yesterday and the "genius" seemed to think fiting a 3rd party SSD voided the warranty?

Cheers
 
Apple uses Toshiba SSDs that have been thoroughly tested for that computer and they have TRIM support for them only. Apple must think 3rd party SSDs may effect the performance negatively at this time probably because they haven't gone thru their rigorous testing, for one reason or another. By the time Lion comes out, they may have tested a lot more and allow TRIM support for them.
 
NikonD3s said:
Apple uses Toshiba SSDs that have been thoroughly tested for that computer and they have TRIM support for them only. Apple must think 3rd party SSDs may effect the performance negatively at this time probably because they haven't gone thru their rigorous testing, for one reason or another. By the time Lion comes out, they may have tested a lot more and allow TRIM support for them.
Click to expand...

Lion will also be integrating TRIM support, so that'll help all the 3rd party SSDs out there out in the summer.
 
Seraphex said:
So..

What's better the SSD that comes as an upgrade option (only £70) vs the 3rd party SSD's that are significantly more expensive?

Sounds like the apple SSD is slower than 3rd party ones but significantly quicker than the stock 5400/7200RPM drives.

Is the extra £70 worth the performance upgrade? Or is it worth shelling out extra for a 3rd party one.

Also I asked in the apple store yesterday and the "genius" seemed to think fiting a 3rd party SSD voided the warranty?

Cheers
Click to expand...

its £80 on apple uk website, but this is in substitution of the default 750gb drive

i was considering this optin, then thought i would need to spend 60-90GBP on a second HDD.... and i would most likely cop the v3 some time soon

ideally a ultrafast next gen 120gb (v3), and stock hdd in optibay is what im aiming for
 
Hmm .. so it seems get the stock drive (probably go for the 7200rpm 500gb_ then get a decent 128gb ssd in optibay slot when lion comes out with trim support and new, quicker drives should hopefully be available?!

I guess it's an initial price save
 
My wife got the 256gb ssd option from Apple for her 2011 MacBook pro and I cannot tell the difference between it and my vertex 2 ssd in my machine for booting and launching applications. However the vertex 2 gets better high speed transfer rates for very large files but how often her and I do that is close to never.




Seraphex said:
Hmm .. so it seems get the stock drive (probably go for the 7200rpm 500gb_ then get a decent 128gb ssd in optibay slot when lion comes out with trim support and new, quicker drives should hopefully be available?!

I guess it's an initial price save
Click to expand...
 
Woodcrest64 said:
My wife got the 256gb ssd option from Apple for her 2011 MacBook pro and I cannot tell the difference between it and my vertex 2 ssd in my machine for booting and launching applications. However the vertex 2 gets better high speed transfer rates for very large files but how often her and I do that is close to never.
Click to expand...

Ahh brilliant ... I'm leaning towards just getting the 128gb Stock Apple SSD then buying an external HDD for all my other needs. In the long term I will probably get a bigger SSD when they come down in price.

Thanks a lot.
 
I really trying to decide if I should get apples 128 or go for vertex 3. :confused:
 
Seraphex said:
Ahh brilliant ... I'm leaning towards just getting the 128gb Stock Apple SSD then buying an external HDD for all my other needs. In the long term I will probably get a bigger SSD when they come down in price.

Thanks a lot.
Click to expand...

i would personally go for the apple ssd if getting a new mbp. I always toss the factory platter anyways (they're worth what, $50?) and $100 isn't much to add for the performance. The benchmarks someone linked above aren't really compelling enough to consider 3rd party until Lion and a revision or two in the SSD world.
 
I went with the Apple 128GB SSD. For only $92 (w/ my company discount) for the SSD, it was waayyy cheaper than a 120GB SSD. Plus I already had several 500GB hard drives that I will eventually put in the optical bay. Even if you buy a 750GB drive, it is still cheaper to get the Apple SSD and buy a 750GB hard drive separately.

As previously stated, my Sandforce 1200 based SSD (120GB) drive in my 2009 MBP doesn't feel any faster than the Apple SSD (128GB) in my 2011 even though the benchmarks state the Sandforce drive is faster (maybe if I was transferring large files).
 
OSX will support the trim feature with apple ssd's only. Also, its a decent ssd for the price and it saves you opening up your laptop.

Also the difference in speed going from hd -> ssd is massive but the differences between ssd'd arent that noticeable. Its like comparing a 2.0 and 2.4 ghz core 2 duo
 
Don't understand why people are still talking about putting the ssd in the optibay instead of the main bay?

- Main bay is SATA iii, optibay is sata ii....
- You can get HD with build in free fall, so no need to use the main bay.
- Don't know what prices you get, but in DK the price of Apple ssd 256 is only $70 less than the coming vertex 3.
 
legreve said:
Don't understand why people are still talking about putting the ssd in the optibay instead of the main bay?

- Main bay is SATA iii, optibay is sata ii....
- You can get HD with build in free fall, so no need to use the main bay.
- Don't know what prices you get, but in DK the price of Apple ssd 256 is only $70 less than the coming vertex 3.
Click to expand...

Does anyone know of a 1TB HDD with the built in SMS? Or atleast a 750gb.
 
adnoh said:
OSX will support the trim feature with apple ssd's only. Also, its a decent ssd for the price and it saves you opening up your laptop.

Also the difference in speed going from hd -> ssd is massive but the differences between ssd'd arent that noticeable. Its like comparing a 2.0 and 2.4 ghz core 2 duo
Click to expand...

Apple ssd is inferior to crucial or vertex.
 
johnnyturbouk said:
Vertex 3; is by far better than the apple ssd!
Or any other ssd on the Market.
C400 and corsair performance looks ok2

SF2000 Sata III on sandy-bridge :)
Of these ocz has exclusive access to the controller for a period of time and 1st picks on firmware
Click to expand...
My question is, how long will it take apple/ocz to get it working smoothly with the '11 MBP on sata III?

Right now it seems there are way to many problems with the Intel 510, so I think the apple ssd is a safer bet.
 
legreve said:
Don't understand why people are still talking about putting the ssd in the optibay instead of the main bay?
Click to expand...

Because, last we knew with 100% certainty, the only bay that will protect a mechanical hard drive from drops was in the hard drive bay. No one knows for sure if you put a mechanical hard drive in the optibay that OSX will park the heads of the hard drive if dropped/bumped/etc. You could lose an entire drive just because you wanted a little more performance from the SATAIII connection (which can only be utilized by the newest SSD's that so far have been hit or miss in Macs).
 
2Turbo said:
My question is, how long will it take apple/ocz to get it working smoothly with the '11 MBP on sata III?

Right now it seems there are way to many problems with the Intel 510, so I think the apple ssd is a safer bet.
Click to expand...

i hear what you saying!

i enquired over at the ocz forums, in between all the 50x100xa trillion raid configs the beta tester were doing.. they confirmed that there has been extensive testing on the imac, as boot
there are quite a few mac enthusiastic over there
given, that the MBP latest offering has native sata-3, im sure the %of ocz ssd customers are about to increase drastically!

they have not tested the V3 on a MBP11 - i told the mods@ocz if they wanted to test the v3 on a MBP 2011 - i would kindly oblige:D

my thoughts were owc 240gb - solid drive for storage/windows solution
then v3 as boot drive

or v3 as boot drive now, stock as second hdd, and upgrade owc 240gb mercury extreme in 6-12 months
 
Weaselboy said:
As this test shows the Apple SSD is only slightly slower that the SATAIII Crucial C300. I seriously doubt anybody can tell the difference in normal usage.
Click to expand...

That drive is an older controller, even though it does have a SATA III interface it doesn't really do SATA III speeds. One of the upcoming (few days I believe till official commercial release) Vertex 3s or new Intel drives will easily wipe the floor with it, and the SSDs Apple is currently shipping. The benchmarks for the Vertex 3 drives (the drives are already available to reviewers) are double and triple that of the C300 in barefeat's tests.
 
seek3r said:
That drive is an older controller, even though it does have a SATA III interface it doesn't really do SATA III speeds. One of the upcoming (few days I believe till official commercial release) Vertex 3s or new Intel drives will easily wipe the floor with it, and the SSDs Apple is currently shipping. The benchmarks for the Vertex 3 drives (the drives are already available to reviewers) are double and triple that of the C300 in barefeat's tests.
Click to expand...

yt7Im.png


According to the above chart from this test, which Anand says is the best test of real world usage, the C300 is only slightly slower than the Vertex 3 and actually a little faster than the Intel 510. The C300 certainly does do SATAIII speeds. If you want a Vertex 3, have at it, but don't be expecting three times the speed in normal usage.
 
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_2_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8C148 Safari/6533.18.5)

If I go for apple drive now then up
Upgrade to sata-3 drive in 3-6months, what do I do with the apple drive, would have little no use for it
 
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