Basic Questions about SSD's

Discussion in 'MacBook Pro' started by shstiger2009, Feb 27, 2011.

  1. shstiger2009, Feb 27, 2011
    Last edited: Feb 28, 2011

    shstiger2009 macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2011
    #1
    I had this thread wondering about if I should wait to get the Vertex 3 to take advantage of SATA III, but do I really need it? I'm thinking about going with a Vertex 2 as I think it will be fast enough. And even if the Vertex 3 was much faster that the Vertex 2, it will sure be much much faster than my stock 5400 RPM HDD.

    So, Vertex 2 after Vertex 3 comes out (cheaper... :D) or Vertex 3?
     
  2. dagamer34 macrumors 65816

    dagamer34

    Joined:
    May 1, 2007
    Location:
    Houston, TX
    #2
    1. Probably wait. Random I/O performance is quite a jump compared to what's out there today.

    2. Power difference from different SSDs is negligible. Difference from HDD isn't that much as powering a screen takes up a lot more battery.

    3. You can't boot directly from a Time Machine backup, but you can use your OS X install DVD to restore to a brand new hard drive.
     
  3. shstiger2009 thread starter macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2011
    #3
    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)

    Ok. So in response to #3 if my SSD fails, simply reinstall my HDD, set up OSX, do a Time Machine restore, and all is well(until I get a new one which hopefully by that time will be much cheaper)? Except running slower and wanting to kill someone? :D
     
  4. 87am macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2011
    #4
    Exactly!
     
  5. shstiger2009 thread starter macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2011
    #5
    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)

    Thanks guys! Makes me feel much better about buying an SSD.
     
  6. shstiger2009 thread starter macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2011
    #6
    I updated the thread so I wouldn't have to post a new one and am wondering about what I should do.
     
  7. Tyrion macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2002
    #7
    If you have a Mac that can take advantage of SATA-III speeds, why not get a SATA-III capable SSD? It's a no-brainer, some are already available, others will be available within a few days/weeks, and the prices aren't more outrageous than they already are anyway.
     
  8. petvas macrumors 601

    petvas

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2006
    Location:
    Mannheim, Germany
    #8
    If you want to have a bootable copy of your SSD, use Carbon Copy Cloner. It's free and it works great.
     
  9. shstiger2009 thread starter macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2011
    #9
    But if prices drop $100 for the SATA II ones...could be more affordable and still reap the benefits of a SSD. But I know what you are saying, at first when I decided to get one I was like why wouldn't I take advantage of my SATA III capable hardware? But still deciding.
     
  10. shstiger2009 thread starter macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2011
    #10
    Yep, decided that's what to do. But I edited the thread so I wouldn't make a new one about a question regarding kind of the same thing. Just wondering if I should get Vertex 3 or Vertex 2 if the price drops after Vertex 3 comes out to save money while still benefiting from an SSD over my 5400 RPM drive.
     
  11. Tyrion macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2002
    #11
    I know where you're coming from, but these things are ass-rapingly expensive anyway, so why worry about the 100$? Also, I'd steer clear of OCZ, they've been lying to their customers.
     
  12. shstiger2009 thread starter macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2011
    #12
    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)

    Lying to customers? How?

    Also, a 120 or 128GB isn't too bad. But for me, I'd definitely rather pay 150 instead of 250. Makes a difference with this amount of money.
     
  13. Tyrion macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2002
    #13
    They switched to a new manufacturing process for some of their SSDs without ever communicating this change; the new drives performed worse, but were sold under the same name and with no indication that anything had changed. Buyers got burned, especially those who wanted to RAID the drives and found out the hard way that some OCZ-SSDs apparently weren't identical, even though they were sold as the same model. More knowledgeable posters will be able to explain the whole fiasco much better, the bottom line is that OCZ was disingenuous at best in their dealings with customers.
     
  14. shstiger2009 thread starter macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2011
    #14
    Wow I see what you mean. Damn, the vertex 3 is looking amazing! But I'm also looking at intel's new 510 series.
     
  15. Tyrion macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2002
    #15
    The Vertex 3 will probably be amazing. The past behavior exhibited by OCZ won't change that. It's just something to be aware of :)
    The 510 looks like a great compromise between performance and reliability. I'm assuming it will cost about the same as the Vertex 3, so we'll really have a choice here: top performance from a slightly dubious company, or great performance from a very reliable company (when it comes to SSDs anyway).
     
  16. shstiger2009 thread starter macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2011
    #16
    Yeah I see what you mean. I think the Intel will be about 300 while the OCZ Vertex will be around 250. Think I may go with the Vertex 3 if this is the case, I mean they have a 3 year warranty.
     
  17. b_scott macrumors 6502a

    b_scott

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2008
    #17
    I don't think I can wait until April for the Vertex 3 - my laptop is just bogging me down. Plus it's not Sandy Bridge, so I won't get 6GB/s anyway therefore minimalizing the difference in speed.

    Pretty sure I'm going to get the 510 in 120GB. Any reason I shouldn't? I have last year's 15" MBP with 2.66Ghz i7, 8GB RAM
     
  18. Tyrion macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2002
    #18
    If you can't harness the SATA-III speeds I don't really see why you'd shell out for the 510. Why not buy one of Intel's established SATA-II drives? Or maybe just see it through until April nonetheless - Intel will allegedly soon release its G3 drives which could bring more capacity at a lower price.
     
  19. pulsewidth947 macrumors 65816

    pulsewidth947

    Joined:
    Jan 25, 2005
    Location:
    squarefrog.co.uk
    #19
    Did you say what MBP you had? I've got an old 2007 MBP, which doesn't have the full sata bandwidth. I've just put in a Vertex 2 today, and I wish I'd done it a long time ago.

    I was beginning to think I'd have to upgrade to one of the new MBPs to cure my aging MBP. But now with the Vertex 2 I think it'll last me another couple of years hopefully!
     
  20. b_scott macrumors 6502a

    b_scott

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2008
    #20
    i ended up just ordering the 510 - I figure it's future proofing, and I can use it on my next laptop too and get the 6GB/s :)
     

Share This Page