Few (Noob) Questions about SSD Selection

Discussion in 'MacBook Pro' started by oButto, Apr 23, 2011.

  1. oButto macrumors member

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2011
    #1
    Hey guys, I'm new here.
    I know you guys will bash me for not searching, but I actually attempted to. I just couldn't find any concrete information that answers my questions completely.

    First of all, I've read that people are recommending SATA III SSD's over the SATA II. Why? Is it really a significant increase? If I do decide to use a Vertex 2 over a Vertex 3, will I be sacrificing a lot of speed?

    Also, I've been reading about compatibility issues. Does the MBP support all SATA II but have trouble with SATA III?

    What SATA III SSD would you guys recommend? I'm on a tight budget...$200 for a minimum 80gb SSD. Might be able to use a 60 gb...but idk.

    How much space does the snow leopard + everything combined take? I heard it was up to 30 gb? Need to know this!
     
  2. kdoug macrumors 6502a

    kdoug

    Joined:
    Jun 2, 2010
    Location:
    Iowa City, IA USA
    #2
    If you want the most compatible SSD than the Kingston V+ or V+100 is an easy choice. They use the same Toshiba controller that Apple uses in their SSD's. I'm using the V+ 128GB in mine and it sleeps, wakes up and performs exactly as the Apple SSD performs. It also benchmarks almost identically to Apples.
     
  3. oButto thread starter macrumors member

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2011
    #3
    Will this perform better than the Crucial C300? (they are similarly priced but the C300 is Sata III).
     
  4. NickZac macrumors 68000

    NickZac

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2010
  5. oButto thread starter macrumors member

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2011
    #5
    I would buy the C300...but there seems to be crazy problems getting it installed on a 2011 MBP...
     
  6. JasonH42 macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2010
    #6
    The C300 is a great drive. No problems in my 15" 2011 2.2GHz. Vertex 3 works well also. SATA 3 gives you a bit of a speed increase over SATA 2 but its not that great that you'd notice.
     
  7. polbit macrumors 6502

    polbit

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2002
    Location:
    Texas
  8. DarkFlame macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2007
    #9
    Spend the extra 75 bucks and get the Vertex 3 120Gb SATA III and use that 2011's MBP's full potential @ 6GBps :D

    I did and it's a dream!
     
  9. oButto thread starter macrumors member

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2011
    #10
    Haha well I've been flip flopping. Went from being committed to buying a C300 to a Kingston V100 and now FINALLY I think I'll get an Intel 320. Vertex 3 is sadly out of my budget.
     
  10. Macsavvytech macrumors 6502a

    Macsavvytech

    Joined:
    May 25, 2010
    #11
    If you have a 2011 MBP get a SATA III SSD.
    If you have a 2010 MBP or older get a SATA II SSD.

    SATA III is much fast in data transfer round 2x, but in day to day life there isn't much difference.
     
  11. phpmaven macrumors 68040

    phpmaven

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2009
    Location:
    San Clemente, CA USA
    #12
    Well, if your day to day life involves using your MacBook, I would say it makes a considerable difference. Not to say that it would be slow with a SATA 2 drive, but to say that a fast SATA 3 drive doesn't make a noticeable difference in day to day usage is just silly.
     
  12. bplein macrumors 6502

    bplein

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2007
    Location:
    Austin, TX USA
    #13
    I am very happy so far with an Intel 320 Series (320GB) in my MBP 5,3 (2.66 Unibody mid-2009). Fast, works with the TrimEnabler hack, have no regrets paying a fair chunk of cash for it.
     
  13. Weaselboy, Apr 26, 2011
    Last edited: Apr 26, 2011

    Weaselboy Moderator

    Weaselboy

    Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2005
    Location:
    California
    #14
    Not really silly at all. The new SATA III drives made improvements primarily in large sequential file reads/writes. Most users who just launch apps and use the Internet and work on some Office documents will be mostly accessing small random read/writes on the SSD and SATA III will make little difference.

    Now if you are accessing large video files for example, the SATA III difference might be noticeable.

    I had a 2008 13" MBP with an OWC SATA II SSD. I bought a new 2011 13" MBP and put a Intel 510 SSD (SATA III) in it. In normal use just opening apps and accessing data on the machine I notice little difference between the old machine and the new one.

    In benchmarks, the SATA III drives do show faster speeds. But in normal usage there is really not that much difference. If the small difference in speed increase with SATA III is worth the money I suppose is for the customer to decide.

    Look at this test that simulates opening various files and apps. Note not much difference between SATA II and SATA III drives.

    [​IMG]

    Suggestion for OP>> Make sure whatever brand you buy the manufacturer offers a way for you to do firmware updates on a Mac. Intel for example provides a boot CDRom ISO for firmware updates on the Mac. Other vendors, notably OWC, do not provide this.
     

Share This Page