Macbook pro 2011 SSD getting mediocre speeds

thefatchicken

macrumors newbie
Original poster
Jun 15, 2015
7
0
My macbook pro 15 inch early 2011 has a 120gb kingston ssd installed. I get about 100mb/s write and high 200's read. I have TRIM enabled. However, I see other ssd benchmarks reaching 4 and 500's, which is nowhere near what I am getting. I am running 10.11 right now but I was getting identical speeds while in regular Yosemite aswell. the ssd has a rated speed of over 500mb/s on write and read, and the sata interface is 3. I would love some help.
 

yjchua95

macrumors 604
Apr 23, 2011
6,725
231
GVA, KUL, MEL (current), ZQN
My macbook pro 15 inch early 2011 has a 120gb kingston ssd installed. I get about 100mb/s write and high 200's read. I have TRIM enabled. However, I see other ssd benchmarks reaching 4 and 500's, which is nowhere near what I am getting. I am running 10.11 right now but I was getting identical speeds while in regular Yosemite aswell. the ssd has a rated speed of over 500mb/s on write and read, and the sata interface is 3. I would love some help.
This is what happens if you have a cheap SSD, Kingston SSDs are one of the worst in the market and they were caught baiting and switching customers with cheap NAND.

Read this for more details, and it appears that your speeds are consistent with what AnandTech tested: http://www.anandtech.com/show/7763/an-update-to-kingston-ssdnow-v300-a-switch-to-slower-micron-nand

You should consider having a far better Crucial BX100 instead. PS - you won't get anywhere near 500MB/s if your SSD is smaller than 250GB.
 

Dark Void

macrumors 68030
Jun 1, 2011
2,614
478
I have been recently looking into SSDs and found some information on this as well. I had originally included a V300 in my considerations up until last night, but will be sticking with Crucial (I have an M4) or trying Samsung if I get a new drive.

Kingston looks good as far as price and for some reason reviews, but the statistics are cringe worthy.
 

thefatchicken

macrumors newbie
Original poster
Jun 15, 2015
7
0
This is what happens if you have a cheap SSD, Kingston SSDs are one of the worst in the market and they were caught baiting and switching customers with cheap NAND.

Read this for more details, and it appears that your speeds are consistent with what AnandTech tested: http://www.anandtech.com/show/7763/an-update-to-kingston-ssdnow-v300-a-switch-to-slower-micron-nand

You should consider having a far better Crucial BX100 instead. PS - you won't get anywhere near 500MB/s if your SSD is smaller than 250GB.
Ive been reading up that the samsung 850 EVOs are good too. Do you know anything about that? -Thanks!
 

Dark Void

macrumors 68030
Jun 1, 2011
2,614
478
If it weren't obvious in my first post here I will give a +1 to Crucial. The drive that I mentioned ownership of is approaching 3 years old now and it runs as quickly as when it was purchased.

I buy just about everything from Crucial nowadays. Great company.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.