Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

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

this thread has Lots of good info, thanks to OP and the rest who shared their knowledge on SSD.

However, in the end, I am just as confused as ever. :eek:

I want to get the SSD in the MBA. But some have said that SSD will only be worthwhile if it uses SATA. I know the old MBA used PATA. Does anyone know if the new MBA has switched to SATA?

Apple is using defective SSDs? Uh..whilst I am fine with paying the extra $$ for SSD, a big reason for purchasing a SSD is because they are more reliable e.g. no moving parts etc. If the SSD Apple is using already has an inherent flaw. What is the point of buying the SSD?

anyone care to shed light on this? it'll be much appreciated :)
 
So a little history...

I ordered a 64GB OCZ SSD Core V1 about 2-3 months ago to use in my Asus EEE 1000H. However, upon installing the OS from scratch, I noticed that the SSD would freeze for about 10 seconds upon bootup and also randomly when accessing multiple programs. This freezing problem seems to be widespread with the OCZ SSD core model. However, some users reported that they had no problems with their drives, so I had a strong feeling that it was due to the old chipset that asus was using in the EEE 1000H.

Fast forward to today...

Since my experience with the OCZ SSD Core on the 1000H was awful, I thought I'd have better luck using the SSD in my new MB. I did a full reinstall of the OS onto the SSD. Guess what? No freezing anymore! My MB performs fantastic now. From pressing the power button to opening up apple.com in Safari, I counted 32 seconds. Opening up apps is instantaneous, even when opening multiple apps. I have not experienced any freezing or hangs yet, so I am extremely happy I was able to put my OCZ SSD to good use. I think the solution to the freezing has a lot to do with what chipset is being used. Apple designed the new MBs to accomodate SSDs, so I'm not surprised I was able to get the OCZ SSD working without a hitch.
 
fuzzielitlpanda said:
So a little history...

I ordered a 64GB OCZ SSD Core V1 about 2-3 months ago to use in my Asus EEE 1000H. However, upon installing the OS from scratch, I noticed that the SSD would freeze for about 10 seconds upon bootup and also randomly when accessing multiple programs. This freezing problem seems to be widespread with the OCZ SSD core model. However, some users reported that they had no problems with their drives, so I had a strong feeling that it was due to the old chipset that asus was using in the EEE 1000H.

Fast forward to today...

Since my experience with the OCZ SSD Core on the 1000H was awful, I thought I'd have better luck using the SSD in my new MB. I did a full reinstall of the OS onto the SSD. Guess what? No freezing anymore! My MB performs fantastic now. From pressing the power button to opening up apple.com in Safari, I counted 32 seconds. Opening up apps is instantaneous, even when opening multiple apps. I have not experienced any freezing or hangs yet, so I am extremely happy I was able to put my OCZ SSD to good use. I think the solution to the freezing has a lot to do with what chipset is being used. Apple designed the new MBs to accomodate SSDs, so I'm not surprised I was able to get the OCZ SSD working without a hitch.
Click to expand...

The last gen can accommodate the SSD easily as well. I will be getting one for my black Macbook in the next few months when they are a little cheaper for the larger ones.
 
zer0tails said:
I want to get the SSD in the MBA. But some have said that SSD will only be worthwhile if it uses SATA. I know the old MBA used PATA. Does anyone know if the new MBA has switched to SATA?
Click to expand...
If you configure the hard-drive model of the MBA in the Apple Store, you can pick either the 120 SATA drive or the 128 SSD. So that model clearly has SATA.
 
What's your XBench Disk test score with the SSD?

I get 45 for disk test with my 5400RPM Toshiba drive. Comparing to other non-SSD drives out there, seems like a pretty decent score for a 5400RPM drive.

Here my disk test scores (along with summary for others):
 

Attachments

  • Picture 1.png
    Picture 1.png
    120 KB · Views: 95
anyone who says that the SSD is not worth it or a 5400 rpm drive is better is iwrong. the SSD is far better technology is MUCH quicker in real world situations. go to the apple store ans use a MBA with and without the SSD and then tell me

*if price and storage are not an issue!
 
I would love to see a 256GB SSD in 6months time XD

a 512GB SSD would be great too..for the same price now! XD
 
mobilehavoc said:
What's your XBench Disk test score with the SSD?

I get 45 for disk test with my 5400RPM Toshiba drive. Comparing to other non-SSD drives out there, seems like a pretty decent score for a 5400RPM drive.

Here my disk test scores (along with summary for others):
Click to expand...

Here's another forum members XBench results. It's a perfect comparison because he has the exact same notebook (same specs) except an SSD. He scored 70 for disk test.

http://db.xbench.com/merge.xhtml?doc2=313067
 
As and when I ever upgrade my HD (not an issue at the moment) will an SD one be compible with my late 2007 white macbook?
Thanks
 
eye.surgeon said:
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.
Click to expand...

Congrats on the purchase, and your enjoyment of the laptop. I think SSD is the way to go as rotating storage continues to become more and more complex, the possibilities of failure increase. New 7,200 and faster drives are great, however they are also very fragile in some regards, and slow in others.

Ever since the classic days of Apple allowing users to create RAM Disks, I have been lusting after a way to do something similar (SSD is still slower than the fastest RAM, but is quick, and chip based). I am looking into some options for my MBP in this regard, with larger size (not lower price) being my main concern.


neiltc13 said:
It would be the same regardless of the type of drive you were using for storage.
Click to expand...

eye.surgeon said:
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.
Click to expand...

You said "Cool to the touch" which is somewhat nebulous because that could mean almost anything to two separate people. To be honest, my MBP (when doing disk intensive work) never comes close to being warm above the drive. Now the location of the chipset / CPU is a totally different story. ;) .



image.php
 
HSE said:
Here's another forum members XBench results. It's a perfect comparison because he has the exact same notebook (same specs) except an SSD. He scored 70 for disk test.

http://db.xbench.com/merge.xhtml?doc2=313067
Click to expand...

Thanks for the link! If you look at the scores and compare. My measly 5400RPm HD wipes the floor with the SSD in Sequential access while the SSD demolishes my HD in random access.

Very interesting. So a 7200rpm HD will most likely be much faster than an SSD in sequential reads but not as far behind in random access. Makes perfect sense that SSD is faster in random access, I just thought it would be better in sequential as well.

I would think assume your HD is defragged properly; booting an OS, launching apps etc, would involve more sequential access than random.
 
dhy8386 said:
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...
Click to expand...

Uh no.. MLC is the cheapo one (and Apple uses MLC), there are significant performance limitations still, such as a random stuttering. The Intel MLC is supposed to be a bit better because of its controllers, but it's still too early to say.

SLC are typically double the cost of MLC for the same capacity.
 
Thiol said:
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.
Click to expand...

Not true at all. The PATA/zif interface still has a max transfer of around 100MB/s. The Macbook Air 64gb SSD has a max read rate of just 57MB/s and write rate of 32MB/s, marginally better than 5400rpm hard drives and well below the capability of the PATA interface. Plus it's an MLC with all its stuttering problems.

If you got a fast Mtron SLC SSD with 100MB/s read and write transfer rates, then you will feel the performance increase much more, even through the PATA interface.
 
It would be interesting to see who's put their own SSD into a MacBook and which models. The Intel's not available over here. :(
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back