MacBook Air 1.6Ghz HDD vs 1.8Ghz SSD Benchmarks

[Tosser]

The rules have changed now though.. you can't lug extra batteries anymore (packed separately) for flights. How come your friend can't plug in his laptop in the power port? 4 batteries.. that's crazy!

Yes you can. If it's normal laptop batteries (size wise), you just have to carry-on.

 

[AidenShaw]

The rules have changed now though.. you can't lug extra batteries anymore (packed separately) for flights. How come your friend can't plug in his laptop in the power port? 4 batteries.. that's crazy!

The rules are at http://safetravel.dot.gov/whats_new_batteries.html, and they don't put a limit on the number of spare laptop computer batteries that you can have in your carry-on. (It's basically based on the WHr capacity of the battery, and even an MBP battery is much smaller than the limit.)

As has been discussed in other threads, many airplanes don't have power ports at every seat. In international business class, you have a pretty good chance of having one, but even there you can't be sure. (For example, JAL is upgrading their cabins with new business class seating. If you get a new cabin, you have a port. The older cabins don't.)

 

[AidenShaw]

Aiden; admit when you're wrong.

I was wrong to have missed that you were only talking about the presenter, even though you didn't say so.

Wi-Fi works perfectly in any good corporate environment.

You wouldn't be able to use it at my company. The WiFi has no connectivity until you go through the VPN using two-factor authentication. Then you need to log into the AD domain. Only then you can send/receive packets to the wider net. Any company that has direct wireless access to their internal network, even with WiFi passwords, might as well shut off their firewalls. That's why many companies forbid WiFi completely because of security issues.

So, I also assume that you're discounting the large number of complaints about wireless problems with 10.5.1?

Even if your Powerpoints are on your hard drive, what about demos or other times where you need access to the net? (If I can't connect the GbE wire, and I can't get WiFi, then I use the 3G EVDO cellular modem built into the Dell.)

Mr. Lawyer, you're taking an extreme stand that the world is exactly like you see it, and that anyone whose situation is different is wrong or on the far fringe. I have no doubt that the majority of laptop users don't carry spare batteries, but for those of us who do it is an important feature that will influence our purchases.

 

[ViveLeLivre]

It's the MacBook Challenge!

Hey kids! Compare this to your $3000 solid-state computer!

Startup: 27.7 seconds.
Shutdown: 5.3 seconds.
Launch of iLife: 7.3 seconds

MMM, tasty! Thanks for taking the MacBook challenge!

Remember, every MacBook comes with better performance, and a $1500 check inside!


Notes:
Tested on MacBook 2.2ghz w/ 4GB RAM and Hitachi 200GB 7200rpm drive (total cost $1520 -- $1440 + shipping and tax)
Startup: from press of power button to desktop + dock's appearance. (MB averages just a little more than 4 rotations of the startup spinner)
Shutdown: from confirm shutdown to complete power down.
iLife launch: launches iPhoto, iMovie, iDVD, GarageBand in order as shown in the 11 second MBA benchmark video.

 

[netdog]

Remember, every MacBook comes with better performance, and a $1500 check inside!

Well bully for you. Again, this thread is about comparing performance the 1.6 80 to that of the 1.8 SSD.

This thread is not for gloating MacBook owners.

This thread is not for slamming it for having a fixed battery.

Duh!

 

[ViveLeLivre]

Well bully for you. Again, this thread is about comparing performance the 1.6 80 to that of the 1.8 SSD.

Duh!

I heard you the first time, and I still don't care.

1.6 w/ 4200rpm VS. 1.8 w/ a SSD: is this comparison even necessary? Stop the presses! SSD is faster than a 4200rpm notebook drive! Duh, yourself.

No, this thread posted the first real-world xBench numbers for both models of the MacBook Air, and it is rightly being criticized for them using real world numbers to back up the claims. If you want sunshine blown up your skirt, I suggest you try the MacBook Air forum. This is "news discussion".

 

[asdavis10]

Those benchmark scores don't mean anything until you've actually used one of the SSD models (at your local Apple Store of course). When the application icon bounces only once, you'll realize the difference. Didn't know this when I pre-ordered after the Keynote, but I'm glad I didn't opt for that 80GB model. 4200rpm? Seriously people. No brainer...if you have the extra cash to fork up for the $999 (who comes up with these figures?! LOL) upgrade.

 

[shadowfax]

Those benchmark scores don't mean anything until you've actually used one of the SSD models (at your local Apple Store of course). When the application icon bounces only once, you'll realize the difference. Didn't know this when I pre-ordered after the Keynote, but I'm glad I didn't opt for that 80GB model. 4200rpm? Seriously people. No brainer...if you have the extra cash to fork up for the $999 (who comes up with these figures?! LOL) upgrade.

If I followed you around, might I catch the money that appears to be flowing out your ears?

 

[gnasher729]

1.6 w/ 4200rpm VS. 1.8 w/ a SSD: is this comparison even necessary? Stop the presses! SSD is faster than a 4200rpm notebook drive! Duh, yourself.

Of course that comparison is necessary. Before the MBA was released to the public, there were claims that the 1.8 inch hard drive would be anywhere between much to slow and just fine, and claims that the SSD drive would run somewhere between like lightning and not much faster at all. For the price difference, we don't want to know _that_ SSD is faster, we want to know _how much_.

 

[gnasher729]

I don't come to that conclusion at all. Of course CPU speed of a 2.2GHz vs a 1.8GHz is going to be faster in the MacBook, but the key benchmark here is of disk access, and the MBA was faster by a large margin for the key metric that it's supposed to be faster in. non-sequential reads.

Uncached Write 1.01 MB/sec [4K blocks] (2.23MB/s)
Uncached Write 29.13 MB/sec [256K blocks] (16.92MB/s)
Uncached Read 0.52 MB/sec [4K blocks] (7.02MB/s)
Uncached Read 22.83 MB/sec [256K blocks] (48.24MB/s)

Bold is faster. Parens are MBA.

So for random reads, the MBA is anywhere from 2x to 13.5x faster. It is also faster for random writes for small 4k blocks.

arn

What this benchmark doesn't give you is the effect that on a hard drive read and write speed depends on how full the hard drive is - the outer tracks carry more data per track and are therefore faster for sequential operations (the 4K operations might also slow down, because on the average the read head will have to skip over more tracks when the disk is full). On the SSD drive, this shouldn't make any difference at all. So it would be interesting to fill the hard drive and repeat the test.

 

[AidenShaw]

Well bully for you. Again, this thread is about comparing performance the 1.6 80 to that of the 1.8 SSD.

Actually, I find it quite interesting that the MacBook clearly outperforms the MacBook Cube Air in so many ways.

Especially since the MacBook is virtually the same size as the MBA, just a bit thicker and heavier.

This thread is not for slamming it for having a fixed battery.

Or broken battery, depending on your needs.

 

[shigzeo]

Speak and Spell - one of Depeche Mode's better albums

hahaha

indeed, i always come back to that album... have for years. strangely though the cd is still in wonderful shiny shape!

actually i am more interested in the ssd express cards for macbook pro - not the rubbish transcend ones that are slower than an etch a sketch but proper ones, anyone heard of a good one lately?

 

[kuwisdelu]

Actually, I find it quite interesting that the MacBook clearly outperforms the MacBook Cube Air in so many ways.

Especially since the MacBook is virtually the same size as the MBA, just a bit thicker and heavier.

Virtually the same size? Volume-wise, the MacBook is almost twice as big as the MacBook Air, and when you're talking about the kinds of electronics in these things, every cubic inch makes a massive difference. When you compare the MacBook Air's specs to those of other equally-sized subnotebooks by other companys (Dell's, Sony's, IBM's...) it's really quite impressive how much power they packed into that tiny thing. They had to have Intel custom shrink the MacBook's processor chip to fit. It's a wonder that the MacBook Air manages to perform as close behind the MacBook as it does... I was impressed, anyway.

 

[changb]

who would pay for MBA with SSD

Question is... "Would you really like to pay $1,000 for it?"

I wonder how many would.

Cheers!

I probably would. Why, basically computers are so cheap these days and we gets lots of value from them. The contents in my computer are worth much more than my computer so I think it is OK. Not sure how many others will buy but if the world is going to wireless and the MBA become the standard tool then the numbers will grow.
never sure of the future but it is a bit of fun to speculate
Changb

 

[AidenShaw]

Virtually the same size?

Yes.

It's thin, not small.

Thin isn't bad, but thin *and* small would be better.

They had to have Intel custom shrink the MacBook's processor chip to fit.

This is not true. The CPU is a standard 65nm Merom chip.

It's been placed in a carrier that Intel was developing for a Penryn mobile platform.

Get it straight - Intel didn't make custom silicon for Apple, they took existing silicon and put it in a carrier that was already under development for a pin-compatible Penryn system.

And, it looks like Intel's selling the smaller form factor Meroms to other laptop makers....

The most interesting part of this is that in a few months the Rev A MBA will be out with the 45nm Penryn CPU that was intended for that package. The Penryn will use less power (typically), and by then SSDs will probably drop in price.

Put your MBAs on eBay now while you can get your money back....

 

[amacisbetter]

Not that much better

I'm actually very disappointed with the results. I thought the new Solid State drive would have been much faster in every instance. The random writes do appear to be much quicker, but not worth the hefty premium price.

 

[Cybergypsy]

I'm actually very disappointed with the results. I thought the new Solid State drive would have been much faster in every instance. The random writes do appear to be much quicker, but not worth the hefty premium price.

I have read that also I will be happy with the HHD one...till next year

 

[winterspan]

For everyone unsure about the speed of SSDs, you need to know that they definitely very depending on Manufacturer and model, just like regular HDDs. There are many different components and even flash types that affect the speed of an SSD.
With the Macbook Air's SSD, Apple probably had to compromise on speed for cost, weight, and probably most important, power consumption. It's understandable, but I am still disappointed by the performance somewhat. (especially for $999... a 32GB drive should be $500 or less)

If I were to purchase an Air, I'd definitely get the HDD, and swap in a SSD myself. For the $999, you can get a faster SSD, and for a little more money, a 64GB SSD.

There have been many recent announcements from different companies about very fast upcoming SSDs. I just read the other week that Samsung has a new line of SATAII SSDs with claimed sequential read and write speeds above ~100MB/s including in 1.8" SSD drives.

Here are some test results from tomshardware.com on some SSDs they have reviewed. Now when you compare these to the Macbook Air sequential read/write speeds, you'll see that the Air test results have a breakdown for block size. I am not sure how the tomshardware.com results are calculated, e.g., if they are an average of block sizes, or what not. But it should give you a good idea of their respective performance.

MTron SSD 32GB
95 MB/s sequential read
75 MB/s sequential write

Sandisk SSD6000 32GB
68MB/s sequential read
47MB/s sequential write

Samsung FlashSSD 64GB
55MB/s sequential read
30MB/s sequential Write

RiData TurboSSD 32GB
55MB/sec sequential read
26MB/sec sequential write

http://www.tomshardware.com/2007/12/17/solid_state_drives/page7.html

 

[Tensakun]

What this benchmark doesn't give you is the effect that on a hard drive read and write speed depends on how full the hard drive is...So it would be interesting to fill the hard drive and repeat the test.

And you can bet that a huge portion of users are going to be running with near-full drives, especially the 64 GB. Someone asked, but I didn't notice the answer, about how much space was left on the store models after Leopard, iStuff, etc. was installed. Look forward to getting my hands on this baby Weds night at the Osaka Applestore.

 

[Analog Kid]

If I were to purchase an Air, I'd definitely get the HDD, and swap in a SSD myself. For the $999, you can get a faster SSD, and for a little more money, a 64GB SSD.

Make sure you find an SSD with the same interface. The MBA is a PATA interface. The drives you describe here are all SATA except for the Samsung, which I believe is the drive the Air uses.

 

[Manic Mouse]

A less than enthusiastic MBA review by Arstechnica

 

[AidenShaw]

A less than enthusiastic MBA review by Arstechnica

http://arstechnica.com/reviews/hardware/macbook-air-review.ars/4

I'll cut to the chase here: the MacBook Air's battery life sucks. A lot. I found it to be a pretty big disappointment, holding it to my admittedly-high standards. I ran down the battery from full charge four times and came out with an average of two hours and 33 minutes.
...What I'm getting for my average battery life is abysmal, though, and I am sorely disappointed by it.

Yes, Apple sacrificed some battery life for the bigger screen that I love so much, but it also advertises a battery life with wireless productivity that's more than double my actual average. It also takes me about twice as long to charge the battery back to 100 percent than it does for me to run it down. Something about this situation is wrong, and it's not how I'm using the computer. ... Since I named a best feature of the Air earlier, I'll go ahead and name battery life (and tangentially, the inability to swap out batteries) as the worst.

I can't even imagine what I'll do the next time I have to cover a keynote and have things like a USB EVDO modem sucking battery like no tomorrow. Maybe I'll buy one of those external car batteries with a three-prong plug built-in and keep it in my bag for extra juice. So much for three pounds of MacBook Air delight.

Waiting for Mr. Lawyer to explain why even though it looks like the Arstechnica review agrees with many of Aiden's arguments, obviously it doesn't.

 

[drditty]

how much is left

And you can bet that a huge portion of users are going to be running with near-full drives, especially the 64 GB. Someone asked, but I didn't notice the answer, about how much space was left on the store models after Leopard, iStuff, etc. was installed. Look forward to getting my hands on this baby Weds night at the Osaka Applestore.

Just returned from the local apple store, this is a very nice machine. The machines I played with briefly were SSD, and were very fast. Impressively light and comfortable to work on, and great screen. The MBP and MB's seem very slow when resuming from case closed in comparison. Form factor comparison, the other mac laptops seem like large bricks in comparison. The air is instant on ready to go. The touchpad is nice. Memory out of the box that is available is 38 gig. My brain said overpriced and poor value, but the reality is a hit. Naysayers will want one too.

 

[netdog]

A less than enthusiastic MBA review by Arstechnica

I think this post is misleading. The reviewer liked the Air very much despite its compromises. I think she put it very well when she called it an "extension of your computing life" rather than a primary computer.

If you are looking for a review to back up your opinion that the Air isn't so great, this isn't really the review for you.

Move on now.

 

[Manic Mouse]

I think this post is misleading. The reviewer liked the Air very much despite its compromises. I think she put it very well when she called it an "extension of your computing life" rather than a primary computer.

If you are looking for a review to back up your opinion that the Air isn't so great, this isn't really the review for you.

Move on now.

I think someone needs to re-read the review. It's the most negative review of a Mac Ars has ever posted. They say it's good for size and portability, bad for performance and battery life.

Despite all of the Air's (sometimes glaring) flaws, I plan to keep it and use it as my notebook from here on out

I wouldn't say the reviewer "likes the Air very much", more that he puts up with the compromises. Saying something has "glaring flaws" doesn't mean you love it.

He certainly isn't happy about a lot of things;

This sounds pretty cool, right? Well, it is, but it would be a lot cooler if it wasn't so limited... You can't watch DVDs or listen to CDs over Remote Disc, and forget trying to rip or burn them remotely. According to Apple, you shouldn't want to do any of that stuff anyway

I found the Air to be quite usable... most of the time...Put simply, the Air slows to a halfway-unusable crawl anytime there's a large amount of disk activity—running a browser that reads and writes a lot to the drive (*cough* Firefox), transferring files over the network in the background, anything. The cruel and unusual 4200rpm drive began burning me on my first evening using the Air, and has continued to burn me every evening since. I didn't experience the hard drive thrashing most of the time I used the Air, but I did experience it just enough to be peeved by it.

I'll cut to the chase here: the MacBook Air's battery life sucks... A lot. Maybe I'll buy one of those external car batteries with a three-prong plug built-in and keep it in my bag for extra juice. So much for three pounds of MacBook Air delight.

Performance isn't exactly the Air's strong point compared to other Macs

The reviewer does like the Air but there are plenty of negatives, moreso than in any other Mac review I've read on Ars. Interestingly he doesn't mention the price, presumably because they don't consider that in their reviews but purely the hardware.

The battery life of the Air is perhaps the most disconcerting thing of all, isn't this meant to be a portable computer? Doesn't matter how thin or light it is, if the battery's dead it isn't much use.