Clean Install vs. Image restore on new Intel 320 SSD

[kdoug]

I just installed a new 160 GB Intel 320 in my early 2011 MBP i5. It replaced a Kingston V+. There weren't any problems with the Kingston I just need more room and wanted something a little faster. Everything went well except the Xbench score is almost identical to the V+. I'm wondering if I shouldn't have done a clean install vs restoring the Image from CCC. Can anybody verify or comment on why this might be?

 

[lavrishevo]

Unless your existing image is damaged or corrupted I don't believe your going to see any real benefits to a "clean" install. Use Carbon Copy or Time Machine and it will save you a huge amount of time and headache.

 

[discounteggroll]

use the image if it is working properly. 5 minutes for image vs. 2-3 hours via clean install and software installs/updates.

making an image a couple times a year (overnight) prevents headaches should your drive die or something similar)

 

[xxBURT0Nxx]

in my experience...

a clean install typically will run better. it doesn't bring all of the junk and preferences along with it.

however, a time machine or cloning of the original hard drive is typically much easier and more convenient.