Has anyone tried the OWC Accelsior S?

zephonic

macrumors 65816
Feb 7, 2011
1,200
561
greater L.A. area
I guess I wonder whether its performance is on par with the Apricorn. If yes, it maked the Accelsior S a great value proposition.

I suppose only someone who has owned/used both would know.

Judging by the specs they should be pretty similar, but specs alone don't always tell the whole story.
 

H2SO4

macrumors 601
Nov 4, 2008
4,658
5,523
I guess I wonder whether its performance is on par with the Apricorn. If yes, it maked the Accelsior S a great value proposition.

I suppose only someone who has owned/used both would know.

Judging by the specs they should be pretty similar, but specs alone don't always tell the whole story.
It hits the claimed numbers.

I had an Apricorn Velocity Duo x2 and it wouldn’t run at full speed, (but there are other that had no issues with it). It did however boot Windows with no issues.
 
  • Like
Reactions: zephonic

zephonic

macrumors 65816
Feb 7, 2011
1,200
561
greater L.A. area
I see, that is useful to know, thanks. I don't use Bootcamp/Windows professionally, only to play an occasional game, so that is not an issue for me.
 

H2SO4

macrumors 601
Nov 4, 2008
4,658
5,523
I see, that is useful to know, thanks. I don't use Bootcamp/Windows professionally, only to play an occasional game, so that is not an issue for me.
Pretty much teh same situation here. I’ve popped my Windows SSD in a regular drive bay.
 

H2SO4

macrumors 601
Nov 4, 2008
4,658
5,523
What drives do you have mounted on the Accelsior? OWC's or a different brand?
One running an emergency copy of Yosemite, (I don’t use a recovery partition. I think a full OS is much better). That is a 40GB OWC Mercury Extreme Pro SSD.
The other is my day to day SSD. A 1TB Samsung SSD 840 EVO 1TB.
 
  • Like
Reactions: zephonic

AidenShaw

macrumors P6
Feb 8, 2003
18,649
4,646
The Peninsula
You will never go back once you make the change. The difference is significant and immediate.
Especially significant is the sudden drop in your checking account balance when replacing spinning hard drives with solid state hard drives. (Or the sudden increase in your credit card balance if you're living beyond your means.)

Most people will use large spinners for archival and less performance-sensitive data, and solid state hard drives for the OS and active application files.

Also consider SSHD (solid state hybrid drives). These combine a large spinner with a multi-GB SSD cache. For many applications they're a nice compromise - much faster than a spinner, but the cost per terabyte is only slightly more than a standard spinner.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ssgbryan

H2SO4

macrumors 601
Nov 4, 2008
4,658
5,523
Especially significant is the sudden drop in your checking account balance when replacing spinning hard drives with solid state hard drives. (Or the sudden increase in your credit card balance if you're living beyond your means.)

Most people will use large spinners for archival and less performance-sensitive data, and solid state hard drives for the OS and active application files.

Also consider SSHD (solid state hybrid drives). These combine a large spinner with a multi-GB SSD cache. For many applications they're a nice compromise - much faster than a spinner, but the cost per terabyte is only slightly more than a standard spinner.
They’re not that bad these days, and often on special offer, especially at OWC. That’s the time to pounce but yes they are not completely suitable for everything.
 

IowaLynn

macrumors 68000
Feb 22, 2015
1,596
366
Especially significant is the sudden drop in your checking account balance when replacing spinning hard drives with solid state hard drives. (Or the sudden increase in your credit card balance if you're living beyond your means.)

Most people will use large spinners for archival and less performance-sensitive data, and solid state hard drives for the OS and active application files.

Also consider SSHD (solid state hybrid drives). These combine a large spinner with a multi-GB SSD cache. For many applications they're a nice compromise - much faster than a spinner, but the cost per terabyte is only slightly more than a standard spinner.
Today's PCIe-SSD can do what $2,000 worth of SCSI drives, cables, controllers - and external cases - could not. Quietly and little power used.

The days of ... ($1000 100MB or older $1500 10MB IBM-XT "upgrade") and yes I have "thrown" $10K down the drain I guess :)
 

dmylrea

macrumors 68040
Sep 27, 2005
3,103
3,877
The OWC Accelsior S seems to be fairly new, I wonder how it compares to the Apricorn Velocity Solo X2? It is quite a bit cheaper.
I've used a few Velocity Solo X2's (even two at a time) and they work great. One big difference is that the X2 can handle two SSD's on one card for a total 800MB/s throughput (as in a RAID 0 or 1 setup). With a cheap cable pulling power for the 2nd SSD from an unused SATA drive bay (the X2 does not supply power to the 2nd SSD), it is a way to get a little extra performance and capacity.

The price of the S certainly undercuts the X2, though. You could also get two S cards, put SSD's in both, and then RAID 0 them, getting close to 1000MB/s read speeds.

One last alternative for super fast speeds are PCI-e blades. There is a whole thread here, but the first post says it all, really.

Not sure about your budget, but two S cards, with two 256GB SSD's (found on sale), would get you 500GB of superfast bootable storage.
 

IowaLynn

macrumors 68000
Feb 22, 2015
1,596
366
...but they can't hold my media collection ;)
Neither could my 10k / 15k scsi system, scratch array either and not intended, not suitable, media libraries? put them on green slower drives. And there is need for hardware RAID6 for important large media projects, client files where you might want to spend that $2K!
 

v0rtex

macrumors newbie
Aug 26, 2015
1
0
I am running two of the OWC Accelsior S cards both with Samsung 850 EVO 1tb drives. They have been working flawlessly. The only hiccup is that the drive that is not the OS X 10.10 boot drives shows up as being ejectable, which I find rather annoying. Wish I could disable that.
 

goMac

macrumors 604
Apr 15, 2004
7,179
1,183
Installed with an 850 EVO. Works great. Getting full performance out of the SSD. I don't use Boot Camp with the SSD so I don't have anything to add on that.

The price seems cheaper than the other SSD PCIe cards, so that's nice too. The prices get ridiculous for something that's basically a SATA6 controller on a board with a built in port. You could get a external drive case for cheaper, which includes a USB/Firewire controller and a case to boot.

Make sure you have a PCI Express 2.0 slot open, otherwise you might get slower performance. On the 2008s and earlier only some of the slots are PCIe 2.0.
 

davidlv

macrumors 65816
Apr 5, 2009
1,318
39
Kyoto, Japan
I've used a few Velocity Solo X2's (even two at a time) and they work great. One big difference is that the X2 can handle two SSD's on one card for a total 800MB/s throughput (as in a RAID 0 or 1 setup). With a cheap cable pulling power for the 2nd SSD from an unused SATA drive bay (the X2 does not supply power to the 2nd SSD), it is a way to get a little extra performance and capacity.
The price of the S certainly undercuts the X2, though. You could also get two S cards, put SSD's in both, and then RAID 0 them, getting close to 1000MB/s read speeds.
One last alternative for super fast speeds are PCI-e blades. There is a whole thread here, but the first post says it all, really.
Not sure about your budget, but two S cards, with two 256GB SSD's (found on sale), would get you 500GB of superfast bootable storage.
Just installed one in my MP 2009, works well indeed. OWC has them on sale now at $51+change.
Found this on the Japanese Amazon site, AFTER I ordered mine;
http://www.amazon.co.jp/gp/switch-l...IKI/ref=dp_change_lang?ie=UTF8&language=en_JP
for about 4,000 yen with shipping, which comes to about $32, depending on the exchange rate.
 

zephonic

macrumors 65816
Feb 7, 2011
1,200
561
greater L.A. area
I took the plunge as well. It's still early days, but the difference is not as big as I expected. Startup is a lot faster, and everything feels a little snappier, but not the ginormous performance boost I thought it would be.

I guess I have been spoiled by my 2013 MacBookAir. Basic stuff like browsing/email etc. still feels snappier there.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.