mid-2010 MBP upgrades

Discussion in 'MacBook Pro' started by BertieWooster96, Jun 14, 2016.

  1. BertieWooster96, Jun 14, 2016
    Last edited: Jun 14, 2016

    BertieWooster96 macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2015
    Location:
    England
    #1
    I am interested in hearing everyones suggestions.
    2.4GHz Intel Core 2 Duo
    4GB memory 1067MHz DDR3
    NVIDIA GeForce 320M 250MB
    SATA HDD 250GB

    Crucial or Samsung for SSD? (still debating 500gb or 1tb)
    https://www.amazon.co.uk/Crucial-MX...1465928798&sr=8-1&keywords=crucial+ssd+500+gb is what I am currently looking at
    Crucial for RAM as well? (is the definite maximum 8gb or 16gb?)
    https://www.amazon.co.uk/Crucial-DD...3&sr=8-1-fkmr0&keywords=crucial+ram+drr3+1066

    Any help with picking compatible products is much appreciated, first time doing any upgrades.
    Looking at activity monitor I am using just about all 4GB with just my day-to-day programs - multiple tabs in Safari (a lot of YouTube), iTunes, Pages, iPhoto etc. (sometimes light Photoshop Elements 14 use)
    What is this about my model being a SATAII?

    Main point being if upgrading all this won't make a major difference in speed/less sluggish then I'm happy to look into buying the 2015 rMBP.

    Thanks.
     
  2. JTToft macrumors 68040

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2010
    Location:
    Aarhus, Denmark
    #2
    Crucial and Samsung are both excellent. The MX200 you linked to is a fine choice. Samsung's competing offering, the 850 EVO, is faster and carries a longer warranty. The speed difference should not matter on your machine, but may matter for future use.
    If you've also looked at Crucial BX200, stay away from it. It's really slow.

    Crucial is a good choice for RAM as well. The modules you linked to are suitable, but you can go up to 16 GB with 2 x 8 GB.

    SATA II means, essentially, that your machine can only take advantage of about half the speed of modern SSDs (that are SATA III) which is why the speed difference between the two drives I mentioned shouldn't matter.

    The two upgrades combined will make a tremendous difference. SSD more so than RAM. You may not need 16 GB, so perhaps consider adding one module of 8 GB to one of the existing 2 GB modules for at total of 10 GB.
     
  3. ghanwani macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2008
    #3
    I put this one in my 2010 MBP with similar specs
    http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820167333,
    but I paid only $79.99 for it.

    I already had a 128 GB SSD, so there was no noticeable improvement (or degradation) in performance.

    My machine feels really slow too, but it is usable.

    You should notice some improvement since you have a spindle drive, but don't expect it to fly like the new machines in the store.
     
  4. chipchen macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2002
    #4
    A 13" MBP 2010 can take 16GB while the 15" version would only take 8GB.
     
  5. JTToft macrumors 68040

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2010
    Location:
    Aarhus, Denmark
    #5
    - Correct. And the OP has a 13".
     
  6. waynewayne macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2009
    #6
    I have the same machine OP, I bit the bullet last year and slotted in a SSD (Samsung 850 Evo) and 8GB RAM (Crucial) and it now is nice and quick.

    I'm sure a new one would be faster, but for £150 it was easy and cheap.

    I'm currently thinking of a new machine for a better screen though - so maybe consider if you're happy with that.
     

Share This Page