Clean Install vs. Image restore on new Intel 320 SSD

Discussion in 'MacBook Pro' started by kdoug, May 5, 2011.

  1. kdoug macrumors 6502a

    kdoug

    Joined:
    Jun 2, 2010
    Location:
    Iowa City, IA USA
    #1
    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?
     
  2. lavrishevo macrumors 68000

    lavrishevo

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2007
    Location:
    NJ
    #2
    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.
     
  3. discounteggroll macrumors 6502

    discounteggroll

    Joined:
    Aug 6, 2006
    Location:
    Greenwich, CT
    #3
    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)
     
  4. xxBURT0Nxx macrumors 68020

    xxBURT0Nxx

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2009
    #4
    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.
     

Share This Page