So this looks like what would be a common score on most non-unibody machines. I'd think the writes would have been faster, but that could be XBench...
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
G.Skill Titan Series 128GB SSD in a Macbook Pro.
- Thread starter Fgozalo
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
So this looks like what would be a common score on most non-unibody machines. I'd think the writes would have been faster, but that could be XBench...
FYI all,
I went and plunked down the five hundo at newegg and I'm getting the 256GB SSD. I'm quite excited and I will share the before / after benchmarks as soon as I get it!
I went and plunked down the five hundo at newegg and I'm getting the 256GB SSD. I'm quite excited and I will share the before / after benchmarks as soon as I get it!
The sequential small reads and both random small read and write is really slow (compared to the Intel X-25M). Is this the result of the MLC controller weakness that is now sort of famous?
Looks like delivery is going to be on Monday. But I'm not going into the office until Tues or Wed. I need to get the proper screwdriver and torx to perform the surgery on my MBP. I don't have an external enclosure for the drive. So I think I'm going to take out my old drive, install this, and do a fresh OS X install and recover from my time machine backup.Can't wait to hear from you! When will you have it?
Spaceball,
If you do this often enough (like I have) you may want to consider buying a USB 2.0 Universal Drive Adapter like the one made by Newer Technology.
Then you can use Carbon Copy Cloner or SuperDuper to make a clone.
Awaiting your results!
I'm running both the Intel X25 and the G.skill Titan 128GB (replaced the DVD drive) in a Macbook.
The Intel is better as it's got decent numbers all around.
However, the Titan is pretty fast especially on sequential writes.
I can copy a 20gb file to it in about 4 minutes.
The low random write numbers on the Titan worry me a bit as I haven't a clue where they would show up so I figure better safe than sorry and use the Intel for most things.
All things consdered, I think it's pretty lame that they still use the Jmicron (with a twist) .
it's just a hack. It works great I guess, but still...
Results 80.72
System Info
Xbench Version 1.3
System Version 10.5.6 (9G55)
Physical RAM 4096 MB
Model MacBook5,1
Drive Type G.SKILL TITAN 128GB SSD
Disk Test 80.72
Sequential 108.89
Uncached Write 146.57 MB/sec [4K blocks]
Uncached Write 110.64 MB/sec [256K blocks]
Uncached Read 11.73 MB/sec [4K blocks]
Uncached Read 202.17 MB/sec [256K blocks]
Random 64.13
Uncached Write 1.93 MB/sec [4K blocks]
Uncached Write 54.33 MB/sec [256K blocks]
Uncached Read 10.96 MB/sec [4K blocks]
Uncached Read 166.93 MB/sec [256K blocks]
These Titan scores I get are better than the other post.
And I've gotten faster benches. It seems to vary.....odd
The Intel is better as it's got decent numbers all around.
However, the Titan is pretty fast especially on sequential writes.
I can copy a 20gb file to it in about 4 minutes.
The low random write numbers on the Titan worry me a bit as I haven't a clue where they would show up so I figure better safe than sorry and use the Intel for most things.
All things consdered, I think it's pretty lame that they still use the Jmicron (with a twist) .
it's just a hack. It works great I guess, but still...
Results 80.72
System Info
Xbench Version 1.3
System Version 10.5.6 (9G55)
Physical RAM 4096 MB
Model MacBook5,1
Drive Type G.SKILL TITAN 128GB SSD
Disk Test 80.72
Sequential 108.89
Uncached Write 146.57 MB/sec [4K blocks]
Uncached Write 110.64 MB/sec [256K blocks]
Uncached Read 11.73 MB/sec [4K blocks]
Uncached Read 202.17 MB/sec [256K blocks]
Random 64.13
Uncached Write 1.93 MB/sec [4K blocks]
Uncached Write 54.33 MB/sec [256K blocks]
Uncached Read 10.96 MB/sec [4K blocks]
Uncached Read 166.93 MB/sec [256K blocks]
These Titan scores I get are better than the other post.
And I've gotten faster benches. It seems to vary.....odd
mac jones, would you mind posting your bench marks for the intel drive. I am torn between the intel x25m 160 and the Titan 256. Space isnt really that important to me (only have about 50 Gb of Stuff including the OS), but I really want to know if the extra $220 is worth it for the intel drive.
Thanks
Thanks
i hear anything with the cursed jmicron chipset is trash. the intel one is really the cream of the crop as of late.
You hear incorrectly... Have you seen the reviews of this new G. Skill Titan? It internally uses a RAID controller for striping and the speeds rival the Intel SSD.
I've not seen a single benchmark that shows the g.skill as fast as the Intel. The reviews I've seen on it are mixed, some good, some bad. But nothing outside g.skill's claims that say it's as fast the Intel X25.
Macbook Pro 2.8ghz w/ x25m
Not sure if this will help anyone, but i've got a x25-m in my 2.8ghz unibody mbp, and here are my results:
Results 233.78
System Info
Xbench Version 1.3
System Version 10.5.6 (9G55)
Physical RAM 4096 MB
Model MacBook5,1
Drive Type Intel SSDSA2MH080G1GN
Disk Test 220.34
Sequential 142.23
Uncached Write 77.41 MB/sec [4K blocks]
Uncached Write 66.31 MB/sec [256K blocks]
Uncached Read 31.80 MB/sec [4K blocks]
Uncached Read 204.67 MB/sec [256K blocks]
Random 488.69
Uncached Write 64.27 MB/sec [4K blocks]
Uncached Write 68.63 MB/sec [256K blocks]
Uncached Read 8.72 MB/sec [4K blocks]
Uncached Read 174.93 MB/sec [256K blocks]
hope this helps someone... my mbp is king
Not sure if this will help anyone, but i've got a x25-m in my 2.8ghz unibody mbp, and here are my results:
Results 233.78
System Info
Xbench Version 1.3
System Version 10.5.6 (9G55)
Physical RAM 4096 MB
Model MacBook5,1
Drive Type Intel SSDSA2MH080G1GN
Disk Test 220.34
Sequential 142.23
Uncached Write 77.41 MB/sec [4K blocks]
Uncached Write 66.31 MB/sec [256K blocks]
Uncached Read 31.80 MB/sec [4K blocks]
Uncached Read 204.67 MB/sec [256K blocks]
Random 488.69
Uncached Write 64.27 MB/sec [4K blocks]
Uncached Write 68.63 MB/sec [256K blocks]
Uncached Read 8.72 MB/sec [4K blocks]
Uncached Read 174.93 MB/sec [256K blocks]
hope this helps someone... my mbp is king
well i just ran a test for comparison, so let the results speak for themselves, i've had no complaints with my intel
I don't believe I ever said it was faster than the Intel. I said it "rivals" the Intel. If you would like to see proof, here is a comprehensive review with lots of benchmarks, directly comparing the two.
I don't know. I'd personally wait for a new revision or new chipset from jMicron themselves or go to another manufacturer. The JMicron 602B controller was the one being used in most of the late mlc based 'consumer' ssd's which had the insane stuttering, and this seems like to be sort of a bandaid solution which is so new, people haven't had a chance to do real world performance on. Benchmarks are great but statistics can be derived in so many ways.
The 256GB Samsung should dethrone the Intel one, as it provides way more capacity and write speeds are WAY higher and read speeds are about the same. I just hope the price won't be over the top. I really want that one
It's this spec that's worrisome.
Intel:
Uncached Write 64.27 MB/sec [4K blocks]
Titan:
Uncached Write 1.93 MB/sec [4K blocks]
Where this shows up in real life application I haven't a clue .
But this probably iis the cause of the 'stuttering' that everyone has lamented about.
Small random writes. Some apps do this a lot apparently and it could be very noticeable some say.
Note: The Samsung MLC drives that Apple has used in the past have this particaular spec about 4X higher than the Titan so they may be very aware of what is going on.
So yes to the above post. The new Samsungs could take the throne.
But we are talking $$$$
Intel:
Uncached Write 64.27 MB/sec [4K blocks]
Titan:
Uncached Write 1.93 MB/sec [4K blocks]
Where this shows up in real life application I haven't a clue .
But this probably iis the cause of the 'stuttering' that everyone has lamented about.
Small random writes. Some apps do this a lot apparently and it could be very noticeable some say.
Note: The Samsung MLC drives that Apple has used in the past have this particaular spec about 4X higher than the Titan so they may be very aware of what is going on.
So yes to the above post. The new Samsungs could take the throne.
But we are talking $$$$
I bought the Titan because of the size and the price vs performance. The intel may be faster but i don't want to spend the money for the 160gb drive and the 80gb drive isn't big enough for me. I was looking for a SSD with decent performance and not have it cost an arm and a leg - I feel as though i have that. I don't need the fastest - just an improvement over stock. It's definitely faster than the stock 5400 hard drive. After having this drive for a week, I feel like this drive will be easy to live with and is something that I can use every day and be happy with.
Just my opinion.
I am quite happy with the Titan 128gb drive.
Eric
Just my opinion.
I am quite happy with the Titan 128gb drive.
Eric
Yes it's a good deal at $300 for 128Gb.
OCZ has released a very similar drive "Apex" But I think it's more expensive.
I doubt you could get a better deal than the Titan at this point.
The market is changing very quickly.
Benchmarks doesn't mean anything right now for jmircon based SSD. They almost never prove that SSD doesn't stutter and also many of the benchmarks doesn't talk about steady solid state where many SSDs does suffer some kind of slowdown after the drive has been filled. Intel has been known to show steady solid state since Intel does a full drive write test before shipping to users.
This drive does not begin to "rival" the Intel drive in any situations even if it is three times faster than Intel in both read/write because there has been many reports of stuttering for Titans. So it does not matter how much speed it has, if it does not fix the stuttering issue, it does not rival the drives like Intel. However in most cases for regular casual user, it is a better deal for the bucks since the user does not do much on the computer to notice the stutter and unfortunately most of the time, the users shouldn't spend the extra cost for the SSD if they don't use the PC that way.