intel x25-m vs. ocz mac edition ssd

Discussion in 'MacBook' started by iAppleONE, Jun 13, 2009.

  1. iAppleONE macrumors member

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2008
    #1
    Which SSD do you guys recommend? Does boot camp works with the intel x25-m SSD?
     
  2. CoffeeWarrior macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2009
    #2
    I am looking at those too. The Mac edition is bull. Its just slower and more expensive.

    The intel ones are due for a refresh any minute now
     
  3. Joruus macrumors member

    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2009
    #3
    While SSD's for sure are the future, the current Memory they use is total garbage, they are good for phones and stuff but i wouldn't recommend them for Notebooks let alone be Desktops unless you use them as a Cache device.
    Once wear leveling kicks in the Performance drops so much, they aren't much better than normal HDD's then.
     
  4. Sareth macrumors member

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2009
    #4
    The mac edition is exactly the same as the normal vertex, no slower, that was an error. You are just paying for a very expensive label though.
     
  5. Joruus macrumors member

    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2009
  6. NATO macrumors 68000

    NATO

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2005
    Location:
    Northern Ireland
    #6
    Wrong! Try one ;)


    I think this might be an issue with the SATA controllers on that particular computer as I've just put a OCZ Vertex into my iMac and OS X installed just fine.
     
  7. Joruus macrumors member

    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2009
    #7
    Well, no, the only reliable SSD's today are those from Intel. The OCZ(Indilinx) drives dont like AHCI at times and you need to use the IDE Interface or you'll get Lockups randomly. On a Mac you cannot use IDE Mode.
     
  8. NATO macrumors 68000

    NATO

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2005
    Location:
    Northern Ireland
    #8
    Mmm, I did a bit of googling about that AHCI issue, I wasn't aware of that but I'm curious about it now. That said, I've had absolutely no issues whatsoever with the OCZ Vertex in my iMac, it's been nothing short of hair-on-fire fast...
     
  9. Joruus macrumors member

    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2009
    #9
    Am thinking about getting a x25-m (or better) once Apple ships the next big thing from Intel since the switch :) (that 4 threads at once cpu).

    But as it is now, after around 3 years you can throw every SSD away, at best after 5 years.. the write Performance of the MLC (the affordable ones) will drop to below 2.5" 4200 RPM notebook drive..
     
  10. NATO macrumors 68000

    NATO

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2005
    Location:
    Northern Ireland
    #10
    I spent a bit of time reading through the Mac section of the OCZ Technology Forum and there seems to be a number of people having issues with the new MacBook Pros (the ones that have alledgedly been 'downgraded' to SATA 1.5Gbps). A number of people have moved their Vertex drive from the previous Unibody MB/MBP and have discovered that it doesn't like the new computer.

    I'm still reading into it, but I really do think that this could be more to do with whatever new SATA controller Apple are using in the new laptops, as there are LOADS of people out there with Indilinx controller SSDs in Macs that are runnning just fine (including mine).

    As much as I'd like an Intel X25-M, they're far too expensive to be practical. I'm getting 120GB capacity, blazing fast speeds for around half the price of the Intel X25-M 160GB. Even Intel's X25 SSDs weren't without issue at one point, they wouldn't work with Boot Camp until a firmware update fixed that. OCZ have been quite good at pushing out firmware updates so any possible issues could be ironed out too.

    I don't agree with your assessment of write performance with SSD drives btw, where did you read that as I haven't come across anything that suggests SSD Write performance degrades significantly over time. I've read a few articles that said there's a slight dip in performance due to the nature of the way SSDs are read/written, but nothing major and certainly nowhere near 4200RPM HD performance! If you could post a link I'd be very grateful as I'm curious.
     
  11. clyde2801 macrumors 601

    clyde2801

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2008
    Location:
    In the land of no hills and red dirt.
    #11
    What about the slc's, like the x25-e?
     
  12. harcosparky macrumors 68020

    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2008
    #12
    I've been doing a lot of research on HDD and SSD's.

    Who knows, maybe by the time SSD's reach a reasonable price point, they'll be good in computers.

    For some reason I have difficulty paying $3/Gig ( 512GD SSB $1599 ) when I can get a decent 500 GB HDD for $99.00.

    Is the SSD faster? Perhaps, but with the $1499 I save I can buy another computer! ;)
     
  13. NATO macrumors 68000

    NATO

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2005
    Location:
    Northern Ireland
    #13
    I thought the same thing a few months ago before I took the plunge and picked up a cheap 64GB Samsung MLC SSD and I haven't looked back since. I know it's a sacrifice in terms of capacity, but the computer feels like an entirely new machine in terms of how snappy the entire OS is, combined with the lack of noise. After a very quick boot, you tap your password in to log into OS X and instantly your desktop is there, all your menu bar items are loaded straight away. You open applications and the dock icon doesn't even get a full bounce before the app is loaded, ready for you to use. Put it this way, I'm that won over by SSDs I was prepared to take my iMac apart to swap the hard drive for an SSD ;)
     
  14. Joruus macrumors member

    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2009
    #14
    SLC chips last much longer :) Thing about the MLC's is, they have a much worse life when you can say it than SLC drives.
    You can compare it like this, instead of storing one bit in each... slot they have to store four, like double layer dvd's. Intel says itself the MLC drives can be used for five years before they start to get.. worse. At least its not like with normal HDD's where you just hear them fail and its over, SSD's just go into a Read-Only mode, or am i wrong here? :p
    There already is a new Memory out there to replace Flash based Storage, where the maker says its much more reliable and cheaper to produce, but we'll see :) When there isnt a better SSD out there than a x25-m by the time the Arrandale MBP's are announced ill have to get a optibay and replace the Superdrive with one of those :D
     
  15. Joruus macrumors member

    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2009
    #15
    And the bad thing with MLC's, once wear leveling kicks in you can't stop it. If you somehow happen to have it at more than say.. 85% full all the time they die even sooner..
     
  16. NATO macrumors 68000

    NATO

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2005
    Location:
    Northern Ireland
    #16

    You're right, but I think you're reading too much into it. SLC will last longer yes, but even MLC will last a long time (certainly far longer than the user will likely still own the drive, and certainly as long as an average HDD or longer). SLC is really about performance these days, but it's prohibitively expensive, and reserved mainly for enterprise use, rather than mainstream consumer use. MLC technology has come on so quickly that MLC drives are performing exceptionally well, and with modern wear-levelling algorithms they last longer too.

    I think perhaps you're worried about wear-levelling too much. All it's doing is calculating where to write data on the drive so that memory cells are written to evenly, rather than one portion of the drive being rewritten constantly meaning some cells are wearing more than others. Because it doesn't matter WHERE data is stored on and SSD (it is read at the same speed, unlike HDDs where fragmentation and location on the disk can be issues), a good quality SSD controller will spread writes across the disk evenly meaning each cell wears evenly, thus keeping the lifespan of the drive at a maximum. Obviously there are good SSD drives and bad SSD drives, but the ones made by the major manufacturers (Intel, OCZ, Samsung) use very good wear levelling algorithms so you don't need to worry too much about it.

    All-in-all, SSD tech has advanced to the stage where MLC drives are outlasting traditional HDDs and are far faster. Try not to read too much into the 'doom and gloom' stories out there because it just isn't the case any more.
     
  17. Joruus macrumors member

    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2009
    #17
    Hm, got a 20" iMac C2D, can't really replace the Optical Drive here because its a PATA one.. and i need at least 250GB of Space, darn :p
     
  18. harcosparky macrumors 68020

    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2008
    #18
    64GB?????

    :lol:

    I probably have 64GB in Applications and supporting files and folders.

    An example .... ( my notebook mirrors my desktop )

    My iMac has a .....
    320 GB HDD internal
    1 TB External ( iTunes, Aperture, & Documents Folder )
    1.5 TB External ( Time Machine Backup & Files I do not want backed up )


    So what is on that 320 Gig Internal Drive?
    Applications and OS

    Drive Stats -
    Capacity 297.77
    Available 193.67
    Used 104.1 GB on disk


    If you are surviving with a 64GB internal SSD, are you using the computer for something beside demonstrating you super fast SSD ????

    I guess you could be browsing, maybe email, and a game or two????

    I am curious to know what Apps you have installed ???
     
  19. Joruus macrumors member

    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2009
    #19
    A 64GB SSD is more than enough for nearly every setup, when you have a mac notebook, take a look at this:
    http://www.mcetech.com/optibay/. You basically only store the OS on the SSD and the rest on the HDD your MacBook shipped with, or when you want longer battery life you can even get a 4200RPM notebook drive :p
     
  20. NATO macrumors 68000

    NATO

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2005
    Location:
    Northern Ireland
    #20
    I'm just using the 64GB Samsung SSD in my MacBook Pro, which is more than enough space for OS X, Documents, Some videos, applications etc. The only thing I don't carry around on it is my iTunes library and my Media Collection (DVD rips etc). Everything else fits on there quite nicely with space to spare.

    The 120GB OCZ Vertex SSD is in my iMac and stores much the same, but I've a 500GB FW800 drive for all the big stuff like my iTunes library and Media collection - basically all the big files where speed isn't a big issue. This means that the OS, Applications and documents all benefit from the SSD's speed, while I still have capacity for the stuff where speed isn't a particular concern (although obviously on FW800 it's fast enough).

    That was the plan really, to be able to benefit from the SSD's speed while having enough capacity on an external drive. Works great :)
     
  21. harcosparky macrumors 68020

    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2008
    #21

    So then the only thing you are speeding up is the OS???

    All of your apps and data reside on the HDD anyway?

    So when I am reading and writing large image files it's off the HDD ????

    Perhaps I am missing something? :confused:
     
  22. NATO macrumors 68000

    NATO

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2005
    Location:
    Northern Ireland
    #22
    Personally I would put the OS + Applications + Documents on the SSD and use a HDD for large media collections etc. You'd be amazed how quick your system feels when the OS, Applications and Documents are all available on the SSD.
     
  23. Joruus macrumors member

    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2009
    #23
    Everything BUT the /Users Folder on the SSD, the /Users Folder on the HDD, simple as that :p
     
  24. harcosparky macrumors 68020

    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2008
    #24
    This makes sense to me as well.

    Considering on my iMac that I have 104 Gig USED it would not make sense for me to use an SSD there.

    I have no doubt it would be faster, but again ... at what cost???

    I would need AT LEAST a 128 Gig SSD, and even that would be cutting it close.

    We are just now setting up the new Macbook Pro.

    With only....
    OSX
    iLife09
    Photoshop Elements 6.0
    Auction Management Software

    .... installed I am using 23 Gig of HDD space. I am not finished installing all the apps I will using on the notebook. Now to be fair, the notebook will not have all the apps installed on the desktop as there as some tasks on the desktop that will not be performed on the notebook.

    Of course my Documents folder ( on the MBP ) is all but empty, and probably would remain so as I would offload most documents onto the desktop once I was done with them.

    I work hard at keeping the notebook drives uncluttered, and also the desktop as well.

    Giving up the optical drive and installing a second drive, sounds cool but I do use the optical drive at client locations to burn disks for them and I hate having to tether external devices to the notebook when working at a clients location. I did the external burner thing for a year or so, it was a pain for me.

    I know that someday I will go SSD, but at the moment the costs far far outweigh any benefits I may see. Of course this is my opinion for my case only, I am sure others would find differently.

    Of course, if the price point drops fast enough, that day may come sooner for me! ;)
     
  25. Joruus macrumors member

    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2009
    #25
    Just buy some 3-4€ SD cards and give those to them :p
     

Share This Page