Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'MacBook Pro' started by letsudo, Dec 19, 2014.
I think I regret not going for the 512GB version.
What price difference was it? I forget.
I'm happy with 256. 512 wouldn't have made a difference for me because my music/photo/video library is so large that even 1TB wouldn't be enough. So, for my laptop, 256 internal and a USB3 2TB external works great.
I LIKE having only 256 GB because it forces me to backup important files (mainly photos and videos) to an external HD. I'd get lazy about backing up if I had a larger SSD. SSD's are NOT bulletproof reliable as the folklore suggests - indeed when they fail they do so totally without warning.
I'm happy with 120 GB.
I have to say I feel more comfortable with instant failure (which is easy to diagnose) rather than a slow and long death (starting with corruption of some files, and then later on dying completely).
While not bullet proof, SSDs are more reliable than spinning drives. Hope you're backing up the files on that external to another destination. I consider any data stored in only one location to be at great risk for loss.
depends on your needs, how massive your files are, etc.
but for me 256 is fine ... with a Nifty Drive and 64GB card permanently installed, for back-up of most important and current files, and 2 small portable USB3 drives always with me when on the move, one for media, and one for time machine. plus some cloud storage (though, i'm still cautious about relying on that).
the restriction of the MBPr disk size makes me keep the computer storage lean ... archive files and more media are backed up on big drive that stays at home (CCC and time machine, and another for media). and with all these backups, it also reduces the risk of losing data.
It really depends on your needs. I see people in the MBA forum option for the 128GB MBA.
With that said, I'm perfectly happy with 256GB, it holds everything I need to expect it too and it works well.
With that said, you needs may exceed the storage capacity and if you think you'll regret it now, then go for the larger SSD.
While SSD's are naturally more reliable than mechanical HDD's due to one just being solid state electronics and the other having plenty of moving parts, the difference isn't actually that big. The assertion is generally based on cherrypicked tests with Seagate mechanical HDD's and everyone who knows anything about mechanical HDD's knows Seagate is the worst brand out there in terms of reliability.
Me? I'm decently comfortable with the 250GB Samsung 840 in my cMBP, but it does mean I have to keep track of stuff I'm not using at the moment a lot more closely than with the 500GB mechanical drive the SSD replaced. What this means is that I much more easily delete games I haven't played in a while and keep a lot of projects and documents that take up a lot of space on my local network drive.
The only reason I'd right now get a machine with only a 256GB drive is the way Apple price gouges you with the 300€ upgrade to 512GB...
I went for the 512 because my last Winblows Laptop had a 750gb drive and I managed to use over 650gb of that with all of my pictures and music stored on it, but if it wasn't such a costly option, I'd have gone for the 1TB.
I now keep most of my pictures (currently around 500gb) on an external 1TB drive, TM backups go to a 2TB Thunderbolt Lacie drive, and I've so far used around half of my 512ssd - which I feel comfortable with! If it creeps over the 256 mark I go hunting for things to trash or export to external. If I'm going away for a weekend I backup before I go, and having the extra space means I don't have to take an external with me.
I can't fathom why Apple would think a 128gb non-user replaceable ssd is suitable for what is supposed to be a full blown desktop replacement! That's MBA territory. Poverty spec should be 256gb, and 512 the standard IMO! I can see them discontinuing the 128gb rMBP next year when the MBA get refreshed.
Can manage on 256 however it`s a squeeze and tend to need to keep looking at reducing the volume of data. New Retina has 512 as this will be easier to manage, ultimately it completely depends on your usage & workflow.
It`s also worst noting that the 512 & 1Tb are significantly faster than the 256, once again it depends on the usage.
512GB is perfect for my needs. It's just enough. 256 was killer for me. Felt super constrained.
Although I need to pick up an external hard disk instead of using 64GB flash drives for my extra Logic Pro files at this point.
Frankly, you can never have too much space.
My photo and music library aren't too big, I always seem to have about 100GB left on my 250GB drive. So personally I would just go with 256.
Or maybe I'm just spoiled. My 2006 Macbook had only 60 gigs and at that time I also considered that to be enough
Wow, it's faster too?
What do you mean New Retina? Did a new one come out recently that offers 512 as the basic size?
Now what do I do. I'm stuck with a 256GB one. I wish I could refund it to Best Buy where I bought it from but it's way beyond the returning date.
How many storage one needs completely depends on the individual user.
There is no general answer to this. I am alright with 256gb, but I wouldn't mind more.
I have the 512 GB SSD on my MBA. My original MBA from 2010 had 128 GB and I found that tight.
As my 13" 512 MBA was a CTO, and wasn't ready before I returned to work abroad, as a temporary replacement (and also to check out how I would find the 11"), I bought a refurb 11" with 256 SSD last year.
Now, it was perfectly fine for my needs at the time. However, I also know that I would be shortly taking delivery of a 512, and that working with the 256 would not be permanent for me.
As others have said, it really depends on your needs. Even now, I could probably work with 256, but am reassured that then 512 option exists, and, as it is available I decided to get it.
512 is standard on the 2.8 13" high end Retina and the high end 15". if memory serves an Apple 256 SSD is around 460 Mbs read write, the 512 around 750Mbs and the 1Tb a very impressive 1Gbs.
It`s not a big deal, however if you are moving/duplicating large files there is definitely a difference. My 13" rMBP just feels snappier than is larger and technically more powerful Quad Core sibling with a 256 SDD (2012 2.3 Retina), obviously computationally the Quad Core out runs the 13`s Dual Core CPU.
Personally I am very impressed with the 13" Retina`s performance, much is related to the individuals usage & workflow. As I run primary and secondary systems (work related) I will likely replace my 2012 Retina in 2015, am uncertain if this will be a 13" or 15" (no dGPU Apple are not fairing well in this arena) however will be looking at the 1Tb SSD
256gb is fine for me. It holds all of the word docs and PDFs I need for a semester, my photos, and my iTunes music. I had to get a 1tb external for my growing movie collection. It was never going to fit on an affordable internal drive.
If you got the SanDisk SD0256F SSD, writes are 500-550 MB/s.
If you got the Samsung SM0256F SSD (I got this on my 21.5" iMac), writes are 650 MB/s +.
It's a lottery between SanDisk and Samsung. I was lucky and got the Samsung on my iMac.
Reads on either one are around the same (700-720 MB/s).
On my 13" rMBP, I went for a 512GB SSD, while I went for a 1TB on my 15".
For me, 512 is perfect because I keep 4 or 5 production VMs on my rMBP all the time. Whatever you need is what you should get.
I'm thinking of buying the Samsung 500/512 on Amazon and replacing this one... I heard that that voids the one year warranty but I think I need the storage more than the warranty?
If you're using a late-2013 or later rMBP, make sure you buy the PCIe variant for late-2013 and later rMBPs, or mid-2013 and later MacBook Airs, or late-2013 and later iMacs.
I managed quite well on a 120 GB SSD on my previous computer: Everything "unnecessary" went on a FireWire disk.
Nowadays my work tasks have shifted a bit, and I need several VMs and a BootCamp volume on my computer. It's kind of nice not to have to plug in a drive everywhere I go, so I'm not sad to have the biggest drive possible, but I still would have managed with the smallest drive.