MacBook with OCZ Vertex 250GB SSD (QuickBench + Xbench Results)

[MBHockey]

I ran a few standard QuickBench tests on my week old SSD. It is quite a bit faster than the G. Skill Titan drive I was considering (the end of this post has results of the G. Skill on the same tests). The numbers are nice to look at, but it just feels extremely fast.

Also note that the drive linked above seems to only have the OS loaded. My drive has about 100 GB of data (everything from my old computer) in addition to the OS X installation.

Here's a video of the drive loading 35 apps at once

It'd be great if someone with an intel x-25m could post QuickBench results.

The computer is a 2.4 GHz unibody MacBook with 4 GB of ram.

 

[ux4all]

I ran a few standard QuickBench tests on my week old SSD. It is quite a bit faster than the G. Skill Titan drive that I was considering, but ultimately went with the Vertex (the end of this post has results of the G. Skill on the same tests). The numbers are nice to look at, but it just feels extremely fast.

Also note that the drive linked above seems to only have the OS loaded. My drive has about 100 GB of data (everything from my old computer) in addition to the OS X installation.

It'd be great if someone with an intel x-25m could post QuickBench results.

The computer is a 2.4 GHz unibody MacBook with 4 GB of ram.

I have one, but it's been in my machine for a bit. I don't have a lot of apps and keep my data on an external drive. Let me know if a 'used' x25 is okay. If so, I can look up this software and run it on my SSD.

 

[MBHockey]

Yeah, I'd still be interested in seeing it.

 

[jav6454]

I know I may sound weird when I say this but, those results are the sexiest thing I've seen in a fast laptop thus far without RAID.

*shivers & spoiled accent* I soooo want one!!!! */shivers & spoiling*

I'll wait however, I know these drives are a little bit cheaper and faster, which should happen sometime in October/September.

 

[MBHockey]

I admire your patience.

 

[drew0020]

I ran a few standard QuickBench tests on my week old SSD. It is quite a bit faster than the G. Skill Titan drive I was considering (the end of this post has results of the G. Skill on the same tests). The numbers are nice to look at, but it just feels extremely fast.

Also note that the drive linked above seems to only have the OS loaded. My drive has about 100 GB of data (everything from my old computer) in addition to the OS X installation.

Here's a video of the drive loading 35 apps at once

It'd be great if someone with an intel x-25m could post QuickBench results.

The computer is a 2.4 GHz unibody MacBook with 4 GB of ram.

Read the Anandtech article for the Intel results. The Intel SSD is still the best although the OCZ is definitely a better value.

 

[MBHockey]

I've read that article. I don't know how comparable the numbers are because the numbers he was getting for the Vertex are much better than mine (as are the intel numbers). That's why I'm looking for a more real-world comparison.

 

[MBHockey]

I have one, but it's been in my machine for a bit. I don't have a lot of apps and keep my data on an external drive. Let me know if a 'used' x25 is okay. If so, I can look up this software and run it on my SSD.

Any luck on running those benchmarks yet?

 

[iJimmy]

attached is my x-25m xbench. I don't have quickbench. My next ssd will be a vertex

 

[MBHockey]

Is your MacBook SATA I or SATA II?

Your SSD might be limited to SATA I speeds (1.5 gbps). Unibody MacBooks are SATA II (3.0 gbps).

 

[ux4all]

Here are my x25 results

Hope this helps somehow.

This was run on a Unibody Macbook 2.0 with 4GB RAM and nothing running at the time I ran this (application wise).

 

[MBHockey]

Could you post the bar graph instead of the line graph?

 

[ux4all]

Here's the bar graph.

 

[MBHockey]

Cool, thanks.

I'm impressed with how well the Vertex stacks up against the Intel. The Vertex seems to be only marginally slower in the read tests (~4%), but significantly faster in the write tests (nearly twice as fast towards the end).

I'm not sure if having 100 GB of my data on the drive affects it in any way, but at about half the price per GB of storage when compared with the Intel, it looks like the Vertex is quite a good value (even at the ridiculous price it sells for now!)

 

[iJimmy]

Is your MacBook SATA I or SATA II?

Your SSD might be limited to SATA I speeds (1.5 gbps). Unibody MacBooks are SATA II (3.0 gbps).

sata 1

 

[jav6454]

Never mind, SATA II is actually 3 Gb/s (not GB/s) which translated into Megabytes is 375 MB/s, which means SSDs are not that far from reaching SATA II speeds.

Originally posted by Jav6454

You know what the saddest part of SATA II is?

Even though SATA II connectors can reach 3 GB/s hard drives barely get over 50 MB/s, and SSDs are still in baby feet form that they reach 250 MB/s, still undermining the performance of the 3 GB/s SATA II can reach.

So the saddest part is no matter how fast SATA II connectors can be, they will perform at the speed of the HDD or SSD, which is to say slow compared to SATA II.

 

[MBHockey]

yeah, 8 bits per byte =)

 

[harshw]

Never mind, SATA II is actually 3 Gb/s (not GB/s) which translated into Megabytes is 375 MB/s, which means SSDs are not that far from reaching SATA II speeds.

375 megabytes/sec is the raw throughput. With signalling overhead (10b coding), the net throughput for data is 300 megabytes/sec theoretical maximum, hence the 3.0 Gbits/sec figure. With a crappy cable, noise etc - deduct 5% of the theoretical performance - SSDs already push the limits of the SATA 3Gb/s spec. And worse, SATA isn't simultaneous duplex - like SAS