Crucial C300 SSD 256GB in 2.53 Unibody MBP

Discussion in 'MacBook Pro' started by covenant, Mar 9, 2010.

  1. covenant macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2009
    #1
    Late Nov 2008 2.53 ghz Unibody, 4GB RAM and a newly installed Crucial 256GB SSD….nice combination. Its like having a new machine.

    xbench reports.

    Sequential Uncached Write
    172.98 MB/s 4K blocks
    169.35 MB/s 256k Blocks

    Sequential Uncached Reads
    31.38 MB/s 4K Blocks
    215.47 MB/s 256K blocks

    Random Uncached Writes
    136.18 MB/s 4K Blocks
    173.00 MB/s 256K blocks

    Random Uncached Reads
    15.83 MB/S 4K blocks
    202.41 MB/s 256 blocks.


    In short, its fast…damn fast. Im a bit VMware user..and VM performance is unbelievable.

    best 500 quid I ever spent!

    :)

    -Rab
     
  2. John Kotches macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jan 19, 2010
    Location:
    Troy, IL (STL Area)
    #2
    Did you typo the 4K uncached reads entry? It seems to be completely at odds from your other results.
     
  3. assassinm4 macrumors member

    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2009
    Location:
    Hong Kong
    #3
    really impressive...

    This is what i got :
    Macbook Pro 2.5gz C2D (early 2008, non-unibody with 8600 GT)
    4gb ram, 128gb Intel X-25M G2.

    Uncached Write
    44.74 MB/sec [4K blocks]
    84.46 MB/sec [4K blocks]

    Uncached Write
    48.06 MB/sec [256K blocks]
    68.00 MB/sec [256K blocks]

    Uncached Read
    35.56 MB/sec [4K blocks]
    28.29 MB/sec [4K blocks]

    Uncached Read
    125.67 MB/sec [256K blocks]
    58.74 MB/sec [256K blocks]
     
  4. rumpus macrumors member

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2010
    #4
    I'm looking to buy this SSD - it has a 6 GB/sec SATA-III interface. Can the MBP take advantage of that ? Or is it bottlenecked at 3 GB/sec ?
     
  5. covenant thread starter macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2009
    #5
    I believe its bottlenecked at 3GB/s…

    Still..it's amazingly fast…really given the old dog a new lease of life, and hopefully at some point a new MBP will remove that bottleneck!

    -Rab
     
  6. Mactagonist macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2008
    Location:
    NYC - Manhattan
    #6
    Few laptops on the market support SATA III (6gbps), the MBP is not one of them.

    Dont let that make you think it will be in any way 'slow' or 'bottlenecked'. the c300 is going to be the best performing MLC drive available.
     
  7. John Kotches macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jan 19, 2010
    Location:
    Troy, IL (STL Area)
    #7
    Frankly as users our typical access is sporadic to the drive. This is where the low latency of the SSD really tends to be a tremendous improvement over mechanical spindles.

    In the time it takes for a mechanical drive to rotate and seek to the required blocks the SSD has been delivering for a good amount of time. On small reads, the SSD can easily be finished before the SSD arrives at the first data block.
     
  8. Thiol macrumors 6502a

    Thiol

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2008
    #8
    Does anyone know why the latency benchmarks for the C300 are consistently slower than for the Intel and Sandforce drives? Yet at the same time the C300 does just fine in benchmarks like PCVantage...
     
  9. rumpus macrumors member

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2010
    #9
    If the current MBP doesn't support SATA-III, then is it worth the money buying the C300 ?

    The alternative is this one : http://www.crucial.com/store/partspecs.aspx?IMODULE=CT256M225 - the M225. Given the bottleneck, what would be the performance difference in a C300 ?

    The price difference between the C300 and the M225 is a whole hundred bucks. Since right now SSDs are expensive, I'm wondering if its worth buying an SSD whose primary advantage (SATA-III) is technically not supported by the MBP.

    What would you guys recommend ?
     
  10. John Kotches macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jan 19, 2010
    Location:
    Troy, IL (STL Area)
    #10
    Are the benchmarks on identical hardware? You have to make sure all else is equal before you come to that conclusion.

    It could be a function of the controller... Is C300 on an Indilinx? Also, it could well be a function of the disk firmware.

    Too many variables without some serious studying on my part.
     
  11. MacModMachine macrumors 68020

    MacModMachine

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2009
    Location:
    Canada
    #11
    i believe the C300 uses a marvell controller.
     
  12. chopper dave macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2007
    #12
    I agree- Anandtech reports 141MB/s random 4K write and 77MB/s random 4K read. For reference, a HDD gives you 0.5-1MB/s in this test.
     
  13. Gabriel GR macrumors 6502a

    Gabriel GR

    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2009
    Location:
    Athens, Greece
    #13
    Am I terribly mistaken, or Intel X-25M series only has 80 and 160GB drives?

     
  14. itommyboy macrumors 6502a

    itommyboy

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2009
    Location:
    Titletown USA
    #14

    You are spot on at the moment. However there are "rumors" to be a 256er ready or very close to release. Great to see these hands on reviews I'm pulling the trigger on the 160 x25 for this current 2008 MBP when I hand it "down" to my wife - after I get my hands on the next highest end 15" MBP.
     
  15. MacModMachine macrumors 68020

    MacModMachine

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2009
    Location:
    Canada
    #15
    i read somewhere that there were 160, 320 and 600gb intel ssd's suppose to be coming out by this xmas....

    i think i read it on neowin or toms....not sure.
     
  16. Mactagonist macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2008
    Location:
    NYC - Manhattan
    #16
    That was my impression as well.
     
  17. CTechKid macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2008
    #17

    The C300's primary advantage is not just its SATA III capabilities. You have the amazing new Marvell 88SS9174-BJP2 controller in there. Right now this is the only drive on the market rocking this controller, and from all the early reviews this controller is really a winner. The M225 just has a run of the mill Barefoot controller from Indilinx.

    You really don't have to worry about SATA II being a bottleneck for this drive. You're not going to come close saturating SATA II in any regular use case.
     
  18. southerndoc macrumors 65816

    southerndoc

    Joined:
    May 15, 2006
    Location:
    USA
    #18
    I thought the Intel G2 was supposed to be incredibly fast?
     
  19. rumpus macrumors member

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2010
    #19
    I see, thanks. What advantages does the new Marvell controller have by the way ? Is it better in Read / Write performances ? Any link where I can read about it ? (I saw the benchmarkreviews.com article but being a newbie to SSDs there's less I understand off it).

    There's another thing I randomly read about SSDs and that is "firmwares". Is it like I need to update the drive firmware first time I install it ? Is there anything one needs to do after getting an SSD ?

    Crucial is offering nice discounts on the C300 on their EU website and I'd love to empty my purse for it.
     
  20. southerndoc macrumors 65816

    southerndoc

    Joined:
    May 15, 2006
    Location:
    USA
    #20
    covenant, what kind of changes did you see with your battery life?

    I'm primarily interested in extending battery life with an SSD. Checked out the specs for the Crucial C300. Some of the read/write power requirements are higher than the Intel G2, but idle doesn't look so bad.
     
  21. Mactagonist macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2008
    Location:
    NYC - Manhattan
    #21
    It is.

    Both of these drives (x25m g2 and c300) are tremendous improvements over any spinning HDD and most other SSDs.
     
  22. HastaLaVista macrumors member

    #22
    Very Good Thread. . .

    If I thought I would have a snowball's chance in hell with only 256GB, I'd be all over this. . .

    Here's my numbers with a WDC WD3200BEVT-22ZCT0 (5400RPM)
    2.4 GHz Mac

    Sequential
    Uncached Write 4K Blocks : 41.96 MB/sec
    Uncached Write 256K Blocks: 45.89 MB/sec
    Uncached Read 4K Blocks : 11.10 MB/sec
    Uncached Read 256K Blocks : 45.42 MB/sec

    Random
    Uncached Write 4K Blocks : 1.15 MB/sec
    Uncached Write 256K Blocks: 24.44 MB/sec
    Uncached Read 4K Blocks : 0.27 MB/sec
    Uncached Read 256K Blocks : 12.50 MB/sec

    I've never run XBench before, I knew my performance wasn't stellar, it's looking rather dismal at this point now.
     
  23. CTechKid macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2008
    #23

    Go here to read about the C300:
    http://www.tweaktown.com/reviews/31..._256gb_sata_6gbps_solid_state_disk/index.html
     
  24. jackzhu521 macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2010
    #24
    Hi dude,what is your current fireware edition? Do you use MacOS X or Win 7 both systems? I wonder how is the performance on XP system.
     

Share This Page