Does Size Matter, for SSD's? 250GB or 500GB?

Heavybarrel

macrumors newbie
Original poster
Sep 13, 2014
19
0
Hi, I'm looking to upgrade my mac with a SSD, for better performance, and I'm keeping the stock 500GB HDD for storage.

I'm going to put the SSD in the optical bay that should be fine for the mid 2012 macbook pro, right?

I'm going to use the SSD for the OS, the application, a game or two at most, and other little stuff, So what size should I choose? Should I just bite the bullet and get a 500/512GB, because they give better and faster performance and guarantee to last longer.
I'm going to use the HDD for storing my movies and music, and will use symbolic links, instead of creating a fusion drive.

I'm looking at Crucial MX100 and Samsung 840 EVO, I've heard that there is a bug in the EVO that makes the drive really slow and Samsung has yet to fix it, but I'm sure they will and shouldn't be problem in the future.

I've also heard that MX100 256GB isn't on par with the Samsung 250GB, is that true? As in the 500GB category they both are nearly identical in performance.
 

wytwolf

macrumors regular
Apr 23, 2012
161
9
Generally SSD write speeds increase with drive size and peak at 500GB. Samsung has worked some magic and used Turbowrite technology which increases the smaller drives speed up closer to the 500GB to 1TB write speeds. Basically they use fast memory (similar to ram in a computer) and then this offloads onto the SSD itself later on. Once the turbo write buffer is saturated the write speeds will drop. Smaller the drive the smaller the turbo write buffer. 250GB has a 3GB buffer while the 500GB has 6GB. Before the buffer the 250GB SSD will get about 500MBps write speeds. But once the buffer is full it will drop down to about 250MBps.

Anandtech explains about it here:
http://www.anandtech.com/show/7173/samsung-ssd-840-evo-review-120gb-250gb-500gb-750gb-1tb-models-tested/4

Samsung is aware of the bug in the 840's and 840 EVO's. Rumours show a firmware release around Oct 15.

You can't go wrong with either one but for me personally I would go Samsung.
 
Last edited:

blooperz

macrumors 6502
Dec 10, 2013
287
1
edit -- I didnt read OP in full, my mistake I thought you were asking about the stock apple SSD's
 

Samuelsan2001

macrumors 604
Oct 24, 2013
7,694
2,121
Size does matter but

the sata connection will probably be the limiting factor on these SSDs. Expect them to top out in the 500mb/s range this is plenty fast enough though and is night and day compared to a spinning HD.
 

nocturnum

macrumors regular
Feb 8, 2014
176
244
Europe
Hi, I'm looking to upgrade my mac with a SSD, for better performance, and I'm keeping the stock 500GB HDD for storage.

I'm going to put the SSD in the optical bay that should be fine for the mid 2012 macbook pro, right?

I'm going to use the SSD for the OS, the application, a game or two at most, and other little stuff, So what size should I choose? Should I just bite the bullet and get a 500/512GB, because they give better and faster performance and guarantee to last longer.
I'm going to use the HDD for storing my movies and music, and will use symbolic links, instead of creating a fusion drive.

I'm looking at Crucial MX100 and Samsung 840 EVO, I've heard that there is a bug in the EVO that makes the drive really slow and Samsung has yet to fix it, but I'm sure they will and shouldn't be problem in the future.

I've also heard that MX100 256GB isn't on par with the Samsung 250GB, is that true? As in the 500GB category they both are nearly identical in performance.
I suggest you look at SanDisk Extreme Pro 240 or 480GB. The performance of either size is very similar and they scream. Besides, they cost just a little more than those two you mentioned and you also get 10 year warranty.

I had Crucials as my first SSDs, but I can tell you they drop in the performance only a few months after (they also hang from time to time, you know, the spinning rainbow wheel). Samsungs on other hand are much less consistent, though they would be great for gamers (high peaks).

Personally, I tend to stick to the holy trinity in overall performance - Corsair, Plextor & SanDisk. They will perform in every size.
 
Last edited:

r0b3

macrumors newbie
Sep 25, 2014
29
0
Hi, I'm looking to upgrade my mac with a SSD, for better performance, and I'm keeping the stock 500GB HDD for storage.

I'm going to put the SSD in the optical bay that should be fine for the mid 2012 macbook pro, right?

I'm going to use the SSD for the OS, the application, a game or two at most, and other little stuff, So what size should I choose? Should I just bite the bullet and get a 500/512GB, because they give better and faster performance and guarantee to last longer.
I'm going to use the HDD for storing my movies and music, and will use symbolic links, instead of creating a fusion drive.

I'm looking at Crucial MX100 and Samsung 840 EVO, I've heard that there is a bug in the EVO that makes the drive really slow and Samsung has yet to fix it, but I'm sure they will and shouldn't be problem in the future.

I've also heard that MX100 256GB isn't on par with the Samsung 250GB, is that true? As in the 500GB category they both are nearly identical in performance.
I have the 250GB 840 Evo in my 2010 MBP and it was night and day difference vs. the stock 500 GB HDD.
 

Heavybarrel

macrumors newbie
Original poster
Sep 13, 2014
19
0
I've had my mind stuck on getting the 840 EVO, if not for the bug I would've had one in already. I wonder if this is bug is going to put a ding on Samsung's reliability.

I looked at the Sandisk extreme pro, its 50-70 bucks more than the EVO or the Crucial, which is quite significant and not to mention its offers 10-12 GB less on storage.

I'm looking for something reliable, for which I don't have to worry about it crashing, updating firmwares, and good/consistent performance. Is there anything else for suggestion?
thanks.
 

nocturnum

macrumors regular
Feb 8, 2014
176
244
Europe
I've had my mind stuck on getting the 840 EVO, if not for the bug I would've had one in already. I wonder if this is bug is going to put a ding on Samsung's reliability.

I looked at the Sandisk extreme pro, its 50-70 bucks more than the EVO or the Crucial, which is quite significant and not to mention its offers 10-12 GB less on storage.

I'm looking for something reliable, for which I don't have to worry about it crashing, updating firmwares, and good/consistent performance. Is there anything else for suggestion?
thanks.
Well, here in Europe the average difference is about 15€. I would look again.

I am a bit puzzled now, you bought yourself a MBP 2012 and now you are trying to get really cheap on SSD. With this mindset, I would say you should be okay with Crucial/Samsung.
 
Last edited:

nudoru

macrumors regular
Feb 27, 2012
244
38
Near Charlotte NC
I put the SSD in my main and the original at storage in the Optibay. I'd get as big as you can afford but at least 500. You're going to want to put as much as you can on it, and you need to keep a chunk of it free as buffer space - or so I've been told.

My 2011 didn't allow for SATA 3 to work in the optibay - known issue with some of them. So I had to set it up this way if I wanted speed.
 

Heavybarrel

macrumors newbie
Original poster
Sep 13, 2014
19
0
Well, here in Europe the average difference is about 15€. I would look again.

I am a bit puzzled now, you bought yourself a MBP 2012 and now you are trying to get really cheap on SSD. With this mindset, I would say you should be okay with Crucial/Samsung.
HaHa, Well you're right in a sense that if I can afford a mac, then why am i being cheap, well mainly because I try saving money on things I can so I can waste that money on something else.

And with SSD's, I'm just an average user, I don't use photoshop or any video editing stuff, I mostly need my mac for my school work, i.e. Word, Excel, Power point, Safari and such. And for movies and music, lost of it. So believe I don't need the most expensive SSD for that. Something that is reliable and fast.
 

poiihy

macrumors 68020
Aug 22, 2014
2,285
53
I put the SSD in my main and the original at storage in the Optibay. I'd get as big as you can afford but at least 500. You're going to want to put as much as you can on it, and you need to keep a chunk of it free as buffer space - or so I've been told.

My 2011 didn't allow for SATA 3 to work in the optibay - known issue with some of them. So I had to set it up this way if I wanted speed.
Yes, like he said, you should put SD in HD bay and old HD in OD bay.
 

Heavybarrel

macrumors newbie
Original poster
Sep 13, 2014
19
0
Yes, like he said, you should put SD in HD bay and old HD in OD bay.
The reason I want to put the SSD in the optical bay is because the 2012 Macbook pro have SATA III in the optical bay, and the main bay is designed for a "regular" HDD, apparently its better to keep the stock HDD in the main bay.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.