Just got my new MB with SSD...initial observations...

Discussion in 'MacBook' started by eye.surgeon, Oct 20, 2008.

  1. eye.surgeon macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2007
    Location:
    California
    #1
    Just received my new macbook today. 4 GB RAM, 2.4 ghz, and SSD. I was very interested to see how this machine would run with SSD, and so far I have not been disappointed.

    In one word, fast. Benchmarking doesn't quite do justice to how SSD elevates performance in a notebook. For one thing, I've been using it for 4 hrs open on my desk and it's cool to the touch. The fan has never been on and even with my ear pressed to the case I can hear nothing. Boot time is blazing. Apps snap open with a click. I can't wait to install vista via bootcamp; with these boot times I will be able to switch back and forth as needed with virtually no delay.

    My wife has the new MB with the hard drive...a great machine but the difference in real-world performance with SSD is palpable.

    Bottom line, expensive but worth it. No doubt prices will half in the next 6 months but that's being an early adapter. I'd be surprised if you can buy anything but a low end notebook without SSD within a short time except in special cases (ie the need for very large drives). I can see a whole new market for SSDs being created by Apple given the ease of swapping drives in these new macbooks.
     
  2. LinMac macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2007
    #2
    I can see price per GB dropping off quite a bit in 6 months as the technology advances. MLC technology is improving and that will make larger drives a lot cheaper.

    I love my SSD based Macbook Pro. :D
     
  3. Bengt77 macrumors 68000

    Bengt77

    Joined:
    Jun 7, 2002
    Location:
    Europe
    #3
    The 128GB SSDs can already be had for about €375. Not too wise a choice to order it from Apple. Get a cheap SATA-II mobile HD enclosure and use that to put your original MacBook hard drive in. Voilà: a way cheaper SSD, plus a handy backup drive. Cheaper than the upgrade price Apple asks for the SSD alone.

    But I didn't come here just to rain on your parade. Congratulations on your purchase! Great to see that SSD does indeed speed up one's computer.
     
  4. eye.surgeon thread starter macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2007
    Location:
    California
    #4
    I really have no use for a painfully slow 5400 RPM external drive harvested from the laptop...my point is not that I did the cheapest possible thing which is what some people here care about, it's to provide info for people that are thinking about upgrading to SSD.
     
  5. grooveattack macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2008
    #5
    i am very surprised how long it has taken for computer companies to take up on SSD, It seems like such a logical step for notebooks ( less power etc.) can some one give me the down sides to it except the sizes?
     
  6. neiltc13 macrumors 68040

    neiltc13

    Joined:
    May 27, 2006
    #6
    It would be the same regardless of the type of drive you were using for storage.
     
  7. drew0020 macrumors 65816

    drew0020

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2006
    #7
    I prefer benchmarks because your feeling just isnt scientific enough for me. I had the SSD for the MacBook Air and it helped a little, but I dont think the performance increase was substantial by any means.
     
  8. eye.surgeon thread starter macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2007
    Location:
    California
    #8
    For low-capacity flash SSDs, power consumption and heat production are much lower than platter hard drives when in active use. So no, it wouldn't be the same regardless of what I was using for storage.

    There are plenty of MB SSD benchmarks already posted on the forum. I specifically wanted to relay real world use impressions rather than a litany of benchmarks. No disrespect to the Air but there are so many compromises in the chipset and processor that appreciating benefit from a flash drive would be more difficult.

    I don't know how much more informative it can be than to have two of the same machines brand new out of the box, one with SSD and one with a hard drive, and compare them head to head. I've done that.
     
  9. Thiol macrumors 6502a

    Thiol

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2008
    #9
    The MacBook Air SSD is limited by the interface. PATA connections just don't support fast speeds. MacBooks and MacBook Pros have SATA connections that can really take advantage of the fast read speeds of an SSD.
     
  10. Stebus macrumors member

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2008
    #10
    I would really prefer getting an SSD but at over $800 Australian, i really can't justify buying it. Hopefully prices will come down dramatically so I can put one into my Macbook. They really do seem like the logical solution for notebooks.
     
  11. drew0020 macrumors 65816

    drew0020

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2006
    #11
    Understood, but based on the tests I have seen I would only get the Intel 80GB SSD. That is clearly the best SSD even though performance is still close to hard drives with a few exceptions (positive and negative).

    I dont mind people getting excited about their purchase, but I still dont think the SSD elevates the performance in the Macbook that much.
     
  12. cogmission macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2008
    #12
    Does anyone know the manufacturer of the SSD drive apple uses?
     
  13. hogfaninga macrumors 65816

    hogfaninga

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2008
    Location:
    Chestnut Tree Cafe
    #13
    I think Samsung for the Macbook. Not sure about the Air. Probably the same I guess.

    I know Intel makes the best ones and once they make a larger one I will get it. Hopefully that will be in the next couple of months.
     
  14. mobilehavoc macrumors 6502

    mobilehavoc

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2007
    #14
    I think it's all relative. A lot of the real world tests show improvement but it all depends on how much you care. i.e. if SSD boot time is 20 seconds but my 5400RPM HD in the same MB boots in 25 seconds, do I really care about the 5 seconds??!?! I hope the answer is no :D

    Same goes with apps, being able to launch apps in 1 second as opposed to 3-4 seconds, not going to kill me. Same with loading games, etc.

    I think if every single second counts, SSD is the way to go. I'm waiting for the Intel X25 series of SSDs to be <$200 for 160GB (might be waiitng a while) until I jump onto SSD.
     
  15. ice00 macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2008
    #15
    ¿Could you please give some times like boot time, time to open Photoshop CS3 or Word 2008?
    Thanks, Carlos
     
  16. sangosimo Guest

    sangosimo

    Joined:
    Sep 11, 2008
  17. dhy8386 macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2008
    #17
  18. dhy8386 macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2008
    #18
    For sure MLC. Apple would not be using the cheapo SLCs and from the performance specs i read, its either samung or another maker whose name i forget...
     
  19. foodle macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    May 14, 2008
    Location:
    Pennsylvania, USA
    #19
    Please please please check the system profiler and tell us the model #, manufacturer, etc of the drive. I'm dying to know which SSD drive Apple is using ...
     
  20. hogfaninga macrumors 65816

    hogfaninga

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2008
    Location:
    Chestnut Tree Cafe
    #20

    I already answered it above.
     
  21. sangosimo Guest

    sangosimo

    Joined:
    Sep 11, 2008
    #21

    you must not be familiar with the stuttering issue that happens with every mlc drive save for the intel drives.

    http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/intel/showdoc.aspx?i=3403&p=9

    edit: the ssd is the macbook air is the Samsung MMCQE28G8MUP
     
  22. HeadForTheHills macrumors member

    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2008
    Location:
    Edinburgh
  23. mac jones macrumors 68040

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2006
    #23
    Apple is using the (defective?) Samsung 128GB MLC which apparently has the notorious Jmicron controller that reviewers have been tearing apart.

    Apparently, all MCL's except Intel use the Jmicron

    But i'm not 100% on this. It's not entirely clear what's what. I'm just going by what i've read in the forums.

    But it doesn't look good.

    In real life you may find the new Samsung to be very fast but occasionally would behave oddly (hesitate on certain writes for much longer than a conventional HD)

    Of course defective is perhaps a strongish term, but I would consider paying $$$ for this and then have it act this way to warrant 'strong terms'

    Thing is though, Until Intel had released the X25, the MLC's with the lame Jmicron performance issue were all there was going , so it was only until Intel made the scene that the other MCl's where relegated to oblivion

    None of this applies to SSD's that are SLC.

    But this is all nitpicking really (by nerds). :)

    I would love to have the MLC Samsung and am sure would find it blazing :D
     
  24. watergun macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2007
    #24
    I thought SLC in general is much more expensive and MLC is kind of the mass enabler version for SSD making it more affordable...:confused:

    Does the problem mentioned apply to MLC only?
     
  25. mac jones macrumors 68040

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2006
    #25
    Yes

    Much, much cheaper than SLC and really is going to bring them in direct competition with conventional HD's

    But they have issues (always a catch)

    Intel, however, has now showed that this can be fixed

    But ******* (Intel) wants WAY too much for the MLC X25.

    they may be gouging as they know they have the only really working game in town .....so far

    Ya know, In a way I regret saying things like this in a forum as It rains on the parade.
    But it has to be done, and with tech it's ALWAYS SOMETHING.

    so relax and enjoy whatever you have. It's good.

    And If it's Apple its great :D
     

Share This Page