Help on SSD choice

Discussion in 'iMac' started by bri1, Apr 29, 2011.

  1. bri1 macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2011
    #1
    Hi

    I'm looking for a ssd for my 2010 i5 iMac and could do with some suggestions?
    I'm looking to spend around £300, any ideas?:rolleyes:

    Bri
     
  2. zombierunner macrumors 6502a

    zombierunner

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2011
    Location:
    England is my city
    #2
    Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_2 like Mac OS X; en-gb) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8H7 Safari/6533.18.5)

    You mean internal SSd or an external one
     
  3. Hellhammer Moderator

    Hellhammer

    Staff Member

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2008
    Location:
    Finland
    #3
    You can get 160GB Intel for that money. It has the least issues and is also one of the most reliable drives.
     
  4. Legion93 macrumors 6502a

    Legion93

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2011
    Location:
    Death Star, Rishi Maze
    #4
    Either OCZ Vertex 3 which uses the sandforce controller or the new Intel 510. I highly recommend the vertex 3 though, it has incredible read/write speeds.
     
  5. Weaselboy Moderator

    Weaselboy

    Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2005
    Location:
    California
    #5
    Why would he want to spend all the extra money on a SATAIII SSD for extra performance he will not see on a SATAII connection like in the iMac.

    Save your money and get a reliable SATAII drive. The new Intel 320 SSD seems to be very compatible and Intel has good reliability.

    See the reliability info at the top of this Anandtech test. (screen cap below)

    [​IMG]
     
  6. Legion93 macrumors 6502a

    Legion93

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2011
    Location:
    Death Star, Rishi Maze
    #6
    I had an intel x25-m g2 in my 2010 MBP and it was really fast. All speed differences are mostly based on benchmark results, in real world usage it is hardly noticeable unless rendering heavy files. I agree with you, intel is way more reliable than other SSDs
     
  7. kixx macrumors member

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2010
    #7
    Wow i think this table is quite misleading, the majority of the SSDs out there has an average 2.5% failure rate? That is in every 100 SSD sold 2 will fail?
     
  8. Legion93 macrumors 6502a

    Legion93

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2011
    Location:
    Death Star, Rishi Maze
    #8
    If it is intel, drives are less likely to fail than other competitors.
     
  9. Hellhammer Moderator

    Hellhammer

    Staff Member

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2008
    Location:
    Finland
    #9
    2.5% is quite average for consumer electronics. Hard drives have much higher failure rates.
     
  10. uaecasher macrumors 65816

    uaecasher

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2009
    Location:
    Stillwater, OK
    #10
    I've tried tried Corsair on my MBP, it seems very fast. But I want to try what OWC got on my iMac.
     
  11. Legion93 macrumors 6502a

    Legion93

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2011
    Location:
    Death Star, Rishi Maze
    #11
    OWC does not produce their own brand of SSDs, just like OCZ, they use the sand force controller. Never tried them but many people report failures of OWC in their macs.
     
  12. Weaselboy Moderator

    Weaselboy

    Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2005
    Location:
    California
    #12
    Nothing misleading about it. Read the article. No manufacturer has disputed it.
     
  13. Weaselboy Moderator

    Weaselboy

    Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2005
    Location:
    California
    #13
    Just a suggestion, but I would not buy a SSD from a company that provides no way to update the firmware on a Mac. At this point the only way for the user to update firmware on a OWC SSD is to install Windows under Bootcamp on the SSD. Other vendors provide a boot CDRom ISO for firmware updates that works on the Mac.
     
  14. bri1 thread starter macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2011
    #14
    Thanks for the quick replies.

    The intel 320 Series 160gb was the one that caught my eye in the first place
    need to return my iMac to apple first though before fitting one, im suffering from not only the dreaded grey smudges but the noisy hard drive and yellow tint aswell:mad:

    bri
     
  15. ZeD X macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2011
    #15
    Speed: OCZ Vertex 3
    Best Trustable/Speed: Intel 320

    Ah, that "Failure Rate" actually doesn't means nothing. It is on a non real world environment, with constant disk/write access. Comparing Enterprise SSDs (Intel 5010) with users SSD.

    But my choose is the Intel 320 SSD. It's the most cost effective. 120gb for OS + Apps Only is the best price you can get, and with the best speed for the price.
    You can spend more, but nothing really visible.
     
  16. Legion93 macrumors 6502a

    Legion93

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2011
    Location:
    Death Star, Rishi Maze
    #16
    Especially on a mac, your SSD choice is limited. Unlike Windows OS, you can even get a cheap SSD and be able to run TRIM on it, as far this goes solid state drives degrades performance over time on macs since TRIM isn't yet available unless with a hack maybe, hopefully we'll see it in OSX in Lion.
     
  17. Weaselboy Moderator

    Weaselboy

    Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2005
    Location:
    California
    #17
    Again, why would the OP want to spend extra money for the Vertex 3 that is a SATA III SSD when his iMac only supports SATA II?

    On the failure rate info. Did you even read the article? The info is from a French etailer who tracked failure of the various brands. It has nothing to do with "enterprise" SSDs and is certainly not comparing the Intel 510 to other SSDs since the Intel 510 was not even released yet at the time of the report. The reports value is in showing reliability history of the various SSD vendors.
     
  18. ZeD X macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2011
    #18
    I don't think so.

    Apple you negligence it as ever. You will only get TRIMM support for Apple Store SSD Upgrade.

    Some Snow Leopard (and Lion users also) have support for TRIMM on Apple-only SSDs.

    Actually, I didn't, just a fast look at the anandtech, sorry.

    About the Vertex 3, It is SATA 6gb/s, but can run (and very fast) on 3gb/s SATA as well.
     
  19. Hellhammer Moderator

    Hellhammer

    Staff Member

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2008
    Location:
    Finland
    #19
  20. Stan Mikulenka macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2009
    Location:
    Calgary, Canada
    #20
    Hi guys,
    this is for Legion93:
     

    Attached Files:

  21. Legion93 macrumors 6502a

    Legion93

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2011
    Location:
    Death Star, Rishi Maze
    #21
    Yes I know, I've done the hack myself via TRIM enabler 1.1 on my MBA.
     
  22. philipma1957 macrumors 603

    philipma1957

    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2010
    Location:
    Howell, New Jersey
    #22
    no it means that 2.5 percent are returned in under a year due to failure. those are rma due to not working figures. which means that the real world number is higher. Simply because people say f this or people lose the paperwork. So every number is worse then that.


    Here is another way to read the math. for intel (the best) which is at .0059 . for ocz ( the worst) is .0293

    so do you want to play a 1 in 170 as with intel or a 1 in 34 as in ocz. yeah the ocz is faster but is more then 5x more likely to crash.

    Right now intel series 320 ssds are the best ssd for any application that uses sata II. If you have gear that has SATA III you can argue for ocz or crucial if you have proper backup and the time saved is used to earn money. here are links for intel ssd 320 series.


    600 gb ssd is 1079 usd

    http://cgi.ebay.com/NEW-Intel-SSDSA...e_Internal&hash=item588dae1c02#ht_2213wt_1189

    300gb ssd is 529 usd

    http://cgi.ebay.com/NEW-Intel-SSDSA...e_Internal&hash=item588dc0850a#ht_2491wt_1189

    160gb ssd is 289 usd

    http://cgi.ebay.com/NEW-Intel-SSDSA...e_Internal&hash=item588da5ee19#ht_2213wt_1189


    120gb ssd is 219 usd

    http://cgi.ebay.com/NEW-Intel-SSDSA...e_Internal&hash=item5d2e5ff718#ht_2213wt_1189

    80gb ssd is 179 usd

    http://cgi.ebay.com/NEW-Intel-SSDSA2CW080G3K5-320-Series-80GB-Solid-State-D-/380332641600?
    pt=PCC_Drives_Storage_Internal&hash=item588d978d40#ht_2629wt_1189


    40gb ssd is 105


    http://cgi.ebay.com/NEW-Intel-SSDSA...e_Internal&hash=item588dc4b789#ht_2545wt_1189



    I own the 300gb model used in my mac pro it is flawless so far.
     
  23. ZeD X macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2011
    #23
    Sorry, but actually it looks much faster for me.

    Specially if you comparing a 300gb Intel 320 Series to an 120gb OCZ Vertex 3.

    The 120gb Vertex 3 is really faster than any 120gb SSD running 3gb/s or 6gb/s.
     
  24. Hellhammer Moderator

    Hellhammer

    Staff Member

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2008
    Location:
    Finland
    #24
    Vertex wins in writes but loses in reads, so the situation is more or less draw. The specs of 120GB Intel don't differ that much, especially the read specs are very similar.

    The main point is that why would you pay 60$ (NewEgg prices) more for Vertex 3 when you can't take full advantage of it and the performance difference in real life is tiny? It is also less reliable.
     
  25. ZeD X macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2011
    #25
    As I already told before (and purchased for myself), my personal choise is the Intel SSD 320 Series. The best cost effective SSD is the Intel 320 Series 120gb.
    Specially if you are going for OS + Apps only on this SSD.
     

Share This Page