MacBook Air: SSD vs HDD

[meces]

SSD is simply better than HDD is real world.

It has been my experience over the last 3 days of heavy use that the SSD and its superior random access speeds lends itself to superior overall performance. I have moved back and forth from my 17" MBPro 2.6Ghz with 5400 RPM Seagate 320 GB (16 MB Cache) Drive and 4 GB RAM and my 1.8 Ghz SSD MBA and I find that for general work related tasks (i.e. opening and editing spreadsheets, editing charts and graphics and even Parallels for some legacy applications) are superior on the MBA with the SSD than the MBPro. I know if I fire up Final Cut or Photoshop that will not be the case. But for daily work it is superior. I also greatly appreciate the superior start-up/shutdown times. Of course this is simply subjective data, but it has been my experience. The MBA will work great for providing an effective platform for working while being mobile. My MBPro will always be the cornerstone.

Also it is important to point out that with a HDD system starting and shutting down the systems causes a significant amount of I/O which has a significant impact upon battery life.

 

[wizard]

My new MBA is sitting on my desk, 1.8 SSD, and this review broke my heart.

Why the hell would that happen? What did you do buy some technology without understanding it?

The primary reason to get a SSD is the ruggedness that it should impart to the laptop. Read speed should be a distant second.

My initial battery life showed less than 2 hours. I kinda freaked out, but I also knew the battery was calibrated, etc.

Actually you should freak out. The battery is one of AIR short comings. It is not just the fact that it is built in, but also that it is the first battery powered device that is missing Apple advertised marks by such a wide margin.

Still has me worried that perhaps I got a bad build, but I'm not going to freak out about it yet.

Well if you got a bad build then a lot of others have also.

I still love this little sucker (so far.) Bad reviews and all...

Hey if it meets your needs go for it. As I've posted before though, I suspect that this will be an outstanding Apple product in only one respect - that would be its low resale value after people decide to ditch the machines.

Dave

 

[shawnce]

Actually you should freak out. The battery is one of AIR short comings. It is not just the fact that it is built in, but also that it is the first battery powered device that is missing Apple advertised marks by such a wide margin.

Yet I see many reports of folks getting great battery life with the MBA. Really do need a standardized way to test and validate battery life. Also we need folks to ensure their batteries are calibrated and fully charged before running such tests.

 

[Aurum]

Bigger Screen sizes

This is a bit off topic, and for that I apologize, but does anybody know if Apple is planning on making bigger screens for the macbooks, air or otherwise? I'm looking to upgrade my very old iBook g3 but I want at least 15" and I'm not shelling out $2100+ for a macbook pro, I'm not that heavy of a user.

 

[MacTheSpoon]

In the thread on ArsTechnica, a commenter noted that Notebook Review got 4.3 hours on a MacBook Air with HDD. "With screen brightness at 25%, Bluetooth off, and WiFi on, the MacBook Air got 4 hours and 20 minutes of battery life with above average web activity. Half of this time was spent in Mac OS, with the other half in Vista."

That jibes more with MacRumors commenters' accounts.

http://www.notebookreview.com/default.asp?newsID=4238

 

[EDdoc]

SSD is only worth it if money isn't an object. If your on a budget it's not worth it at all.

I agree, if you are on a budget it is excessive, but I will be using my MBA over the next 2 years or so and every time I launch one of those programs or boot up I will have the joy of working on a quicker computer. It will be that much nicer to have the edge, even if it is little. It's like flying from LA to NYC. It does not matter if you travel in Coach or First Class as you will arrive at the same time. However it sure is more comfortable and nicer in First Class.

 

[wizard]

Poor implementation.

This discussion has me wondering a bit about the implementation of the PATA port in the AIR. That is are the drivers and hardware fully enabling the best transfer rates possilbe on this old I/O port?

The other thing for users of the SSD to consider here is that the Flash drive might not be a high performance model. Contrary to popular opinion SSD do not automatically imply fast access. Considering the PATA port this could be a SSD implemented on an old compact flash controller. As we all know there is a wide range of performance available out of compact flash drives. Maybe somebody can come up with a manufactures number off their SSD drive.*

In any event I think the people that where barfing at the PATA port upon the AIR's arrival where entirely justified. PATA is no place to implement modern technology like flash much less the high speed stuff coming down the pike. Sadly I must agree with other posters here that describe the AIR as a prototype.



*
Note; if this speculation is indeed correct I will laugh my ass off as ASUS is using a compact flash controller in their EEE PC. This would be another aspect of the AIR that would justify calling it Apples most over priced hardware yet to date.

Dave

 

[notjustjay]

Regarding the battery test...
Since when is a sustained H.264 (most likely) decode "not intensive"?

Bingo.

Just look at the difference in battery life on the iPods, when they're playing videos as opposed to playing music. A small fraction of the playback time.

There's your problem.

 

[asdavis10]

Benchmarks mean very little to me. I'm sure their valuable to most people but the differences between the HDD and SSD models were going to be so slight anyway. The SSD model wasn't going to blow away the HDD model just because on a flash based drive and .2GHz faster processor. Come tech boys. I'm playing with my SSD Air now and from my experience with the HDD model at the Apple Store, there is no comparison if you have the extra money to spare. The OS boots quicker than anything I've ever experienced (not that its that big of a high note). Applications load after only one bounce, if that. Just keep in mind how many times your iPod has frozen on you with that same 1.8, single plater, HDD. Your data is much safer on a SSD. And don't talk about the finite around of writes that you can do on a SSD. You will have long replaced your computer before that becomes an issue. Face it, the Air was never going to be a must-have product. So why is everyone talking about it like it is? Either you have some money sitting around and you WANT one or you don't. No one who buys an Air will be able to say that they NEED it. You could have spent a lot less on a MacBook with higher specs. And don't cry about multi-touch not being in your MacBook or MacBook Pro. Its coming so just wait.

 

[wizard]

Yet I see many reports of folks getting great battery life with the MBA. Really do need a standardized way to test and validate battery life. Also we need folks to ensure their batteries are calibrated and fully charged before running such tests.

I have some trust in ARS. The wide range of on battery performance we are seeing could be a number of things including poor quality control at the battery manufacture.

I'm more interested in the subject form the technical standpoint as I've already figured out that the AIR just isn't configured for my needs. At least right now. With respect to the SSD there are a number of things that really haven't been tested well yet.

For example just how much does it improve battery life. Note this isn't easy to test as all batteries are a bit different. Ideally you would have two machines on hand and swap the "drives" between the two.

Another issue is more subjective but just how does the SSD impact the feel of the machine. Does getting rid of the seek time and the slightly better read times make for a better user experience. I'm wiling to bet it does.

How does the Apple supplied drive stack up against the competition. There are a lot of SSD drives out there that I'm sure would provide interesting data for discussion. The problem of course is that it costs $$$ to test these and on something like the air wouldn't be easy to do.

Dave

 

[Yanimac]

Not the point to me

To me the main advantage of an SSD drive is that it won't fail like a Hard Drive as there are no moving parts. This is a laptop that can seriously be shaken and stirred. It's a bit like the regular ipods having hard drives that can risk failing a lot easier than the ipod touch.
With my current ipod touch I can shake it and move it like crazy while in operation without worrying. If it was hard drive based then I'd be extra careful in how I would handle it.
As a Mac Tech I have seen so many student laptop hard drives fail for which I assume is mishandling. If they had SSD's instead, then that would alleviate the problem. (Keep in mind, that I think some students know exactly how to crash a hard drive so that they can have an excuse not to hand in their homework on time

 

[xraydoc]

Last weekend at my local Apple store I rebooted the MBA with a SSD and a black MacBook at the same time and watched them start. The 2.2GHz MacBook with a 160GB 5400 RPM drive booted about 8-10 seconds faster than the MacBook Air with the SSD. And about 20 seconds faster than the Air with the HDD.

Some online reports say the MacBook Air with the SSD boots faster than the standard MacBook, but slower than a MacBook Pro (which I find interesting, since if you assume the MBP doesn't have a 7200 RPM HDD, the 2.2GHz MB and base 2.2GHz MBP should be otherwise the same in terms of speed (with exception of graphics-dependent applications). Both have same processor speed, bus speed, RAM speed and drive speed. Both use the same Intel chipset with the exception of the integrated graphics controller.

Anyway, I just thought I'd share that.

 

[clevin]

half of the claimed battery life? lol, nowadays these companies are all liars. My EEE only last 2.5, compare to claimed 3.5.

 

[tstarks33]

What's overpriced about it? From the comments when the MBA was announced, the SSD upgrade was in line with that other manufacturers were charging.

Well, I would assume he's talking about price to performance ratio. If something costs over $1000 more, yet is barely faster (and slower in some respects) than the cheaper model, many folks would call that overpriced.

 

[Alfadoc]

half of the claimed battery life? lol, nowadays these companies are all liars. My EEE only last 2.5, compare to claimed 3.5.

My MBA lasts 3:58-4:40, compared to claimed 5 hours.

 

[Tummy]

the next macbook pro's are speculated to be graced by the presence of those black mba keys.

After sufering with the aluminum color keys for a long time, I'm very happy with the change.

In medium lighting, with the backlight on, you can not see the letters on the aluminum keys, where white on black is much easier to see in all lighting conditions.

 

[kuwisdelu]

Well, I would assume he's talking about price to performance ratio. If something costs over $1000 more, yet is barely faster (and slower in some respects) than the cheaper model, many folks would call that overpriced.

Yes, but I think his point was it's not overpriced relative to other companies. The original comment had some rather nasty things to say about Apple, when really it has nothing to do with Apple. That's just how SSD's are priced right now. If they're overpriced, they're overpriced across the board. Apple has nothing to do with that, at all, and certainly isn't "shoving" anything down anyone's throat...

I'm curious how they did these tests and what exactly impacts daily use the most. Because lots of the users here report the SSD models to be quite "snappy" and don't "feel" any slower than their MBP's. I can't report anything since I've used neither in person, but it's curious. Lots of users here also report much longer battery life than that 2.5 hours. If you check the battery threads, it seems like lots of them are getting about 4-5 hours, except for a few duds, in keeping with Apple's estimates (given light use).

 

[dsnort]

HAH!

sorry ssd mba owners, but apple owns you. They will shove down your throat whatever they think is best for you, and you eat that sh*t up like no other! (nice justifications on the posts above btw )

That so much anger and bile could be generated by an inanimate object like the MBA is astounding!

Peace gothamm, anger hurts only the angry.

 

[Freyqq]

To me the main advantage of an SSD drive is that it won't fail like a Hard Drive as there are no moving parts. This is a laptop that can seriously be shaken and stirred. It's a bit like the regular ipods having hard drives that can risk failing a lot easier than the ipod touch.
With my current ipod touch I can shake it and move it like crazy while in operation without worrying. If it was hard drive based then I'd be extra careful in how I would handle it.
As a Mac Tech I have seen so many student laptop hard drives fail for which I assume is mishandling. If they had SSD's instead, then that would alleviate the problem. (Keep in mind, that I think some students know exactly how to crash a hard drive so that they can have an excuse not to hand in their homework on time

I walk around with my mbp on all the time and don't have any issues. Just don't jump on a trampoline while watching a TV show and you should be fine.

 

[petrocket]

SSD vs. a 4200 RPM drive...

I noticed in this review they don't show the random/sequential stats for a regular speed hard drive (laptop or desktop or scsi). They just compared ssd with the 4200 rpm drive. Most laptops come with drives at least 5400 rpm and you can get some faster. Desktop drives and SCSI go up to 10,000+ rpm. While that may not do much for the random read/writes, it should put the sequential read/writes of the SSD to shame.

 

[liveexpo]

Bingo.

Just look at the difference in battery life on the iPods, when they're playing videos as opposed to playing music. A small fraction of the playback time.

There's your problem.

Surely its more the fact that you'd be using the screen constantly when viewing a video, rather than not when listening to music?

Tired of people desperately trying to defend Apple......they made a sucky product. Get over it.....

 

[alexcellent]

Right on my friend. The aspect of data loss/corruption means or could mean a loss of $1000s in a business environment. The extra $999 pales in comparison. In a personal home use it could mean the loss of valuable and irreplaceable photos, docs, financial data, etc.

The SSD is a wise choice if the above is meaningful to you. It's simply a better insurance against data loss.

The HDD MBA has backup taken care of..kind of. If you are worried about your machine crashing and losing files/data, you can access the harddrive from another machine via wireless... or a 99 dollar .mac account gives you online storage.
Or if you have irreplaceable photos, GET AN EXTERNAL HD.

 

[ncbill]

Yep, the review shows just how much of a compromise even a cutting edge 1.8" hard drive (cutting edge = 4200RPM instead of 3600RPM) is compared to the cheapest currently shipping 5400RPM 2.5" hard drive.

Would anyone be willing to tolerate the multiple beachballs reported in the article on a lowly MacBook?

I noticed in this review they don't show the random/sequential stats for a regular speed hard drive (laptop or desktop or scsi). They just compared ssd with the 4200 rpm drive. Most laptops come with drives at least 5400 rpm and you can get some faster. Desktop drives and SCSI go up to 10,000+ rpm. While that may not do much for the random read/writes, it should put the sequential read/writes of the SSD to shame.

 

[arn]

Does anyone have a 1.6GHz SSD? I'd be curious to see how that compares to the 1.6GHz HDD.

arn

 

[twoodcc]

yeah, sounds like the SSD is not worth the money