Most reliable SSD for iMac 2011

Discussion in 'iMac' started by olindacat, May 26, 2011.

  1. olindacat macrumors member

    olindacat

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2011
    Location:
    Kula, HI
    #1
    I was planning on getting Vertex 3s but have read about reliability issues with the maker in general. What is the safest bet for an SSD that doesn't require a 4-6wk Apple wait?
     
  2. ZeD X macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2011
    #2
    The most reliable is the Intel 320 Series SSD. Period.

    They are the only one that have 5 years warranty.

    OCZ Vertex 3 are the fastest.
     
  3. olindacat thread starter macrumors member

    olindacat

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2011
    Location:
    Kula, HI
    #3
    I read that too. Is the 320 warranty still okay if I stripe, and can I? (Thinking one in OB w/Sata III cable from HDD swapped.)
     
  4. ZeD X macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2011
    #4
    I don't understand what you mean.

    But as every eletronic stuff, it's a limited warranty. If they cant detect that you did something wrong with that (if you did), so you can do it.
     
  5. mikeyg36 macrumors member

    Joined:
    Mar 21, 2011
    Location:
    Maryland
    #5
    He said it all right here, if you want reliability go with the Intel. It may not be the fastest but from a reliability standpoint nothing beats it. :)
     
  6. iLidz macrumors member

    iLidz

    Joined:
    May 19, 2011
    Location:
    California
    #6
    I was just looking at the Vertex 3 as well but came to the same conclusion as you (based mainly on customer reviews). I'm just not willing to take the risk with an unreliable SSD due to having to re-tear into the iMac if any problems arise.

    How does the Intel 320 compare to the 510 series?
     
  7. ZeD X macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2011
    #7
    Look, Intel 320 Series is the most reliable. Vertex 3 is not unreliable. It's very reliable, but not the most.

    Intel 510 and 320 are about the same reliability for normal use, but it's designed for intense use, what you will not archive on normal desktop use.
     
  8. olindacat thread starter macrumors member

    olindacat

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2011
    Location:
    Kula, HI
    #8
    ZeD: I read the 510 is Intel's performance answer, is that right? Then the 320 (as you said) is the safest bet, right?
     
  9. ZeD X macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2011
    #9
    They are about the same speed, as you can see on the AnandTech benchmarks.

    The main difference is that the 510 Series are designed for server use.

    The best cost effective: Intel 320 Series

    OCZ Vertex 3 is my preference for the extra speed. If they were the same price of the Intel 320 Series, for sure they will be my choice.

    As living in a **** country (Brazil), I need to pay 60% for the customs for the Product price + Shipping value, and my money worths about half of the Dollar, so Intel 320 is my choise.

    Disconsidering price, of course OCZ Vertex 3 is a better choise. I doubt that you will have any problem with redability on them.

    But of course, Intel 510, them 320 Series are the most reliable.
     
  10. olindacat thread starter macrumors member

    olindacat

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2011
    Location:
    Kula, HI
    #10
    Is OS SW RAID 0 an issue for the 320 IYO Zed?
     
  11. ZeD X macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2011
    #11
    In raid it will be even more faster and reliable.

    But about the 510 Series: I dont think it will be more reliable in Desktop use. In server use (intense use, all the time) it will for sure be more reliable. It is intended to be. For desktop use you should use 320 Series.

    There's no point to pick the 510 for Desktop.
     
  12. rogerino macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    May 26, 2011
    #12
    Why do you say that in raid mode is more reliable ?

    I believed it is less reliable....
     
  13. olindacat thread starter macrumors member

    olindacat

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2011
    Location:
    Kula, HI
    #13
    One way to look at this is if your internal drives (SSD or HDD) croak, just pray it happens long after TB has become a standard and we can boot from a $69 2TB TB SSD :D
     
  14. ZeD X macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2011
    #14
    In raid 0 you will distribute half of the file in each SSD, so it will be used less, to read or write (the problem of SSD are on write/delete).
     
  15. coolspot18 macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2010
    Location:
    Canada
    #15
    Not if it is RAID 0 -in which case it will be 2x as unreliable.

    Perhaps, but you also have twice the chance of failure. If one disk goes, all your data goes as well.
     
  16. ZeD X macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2011
    #16
    Talking about SSD you don't have "failures" as HDDs.

    It can wear by use, writing/deleting files.

    If your SSD last 1 month, it will probably last "forever" (comparing with an HDD) (at least for reading, if the write cycles wears).

    You will probably throw it away before it loses your data by failure.
     
  17. iamthedudeman macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2007
    #17
    The Apple SSD. Order the 21.5 and have it shipped in two days. Add a Cinema Display and you're good to go. ;)
     
  18. sth macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2006
    Location:
    The old world
    #18
  19. GenesMan macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    May 30, 2011
    #19
    Just a silly question: If you install your own SSD on your new iMac doesn't this voids your warranty ?
     
  20. skasol macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2007
    #20
    I thought you couldn't do your own SSD on the new imac, I want a 27" with a 1tb and I wanted to ad my own SSD. I was told there were some heat issues due to some sensor issues. please let me know. thank you.
     
  21. sth macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2006
    Location:
    The old world
    #21
    Only if you break something during installation.
    Problems that could be related to the SSD are also not covered.

    You only void the warranty if you disassemble the internal cooling system. Apple marked those parts with stickers inside the system.
     
  22. Hellhammer Moderator

    Hellhammer

    Staff Member

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2008
    Location:
    Finland
    #22
    320 Series is actually faster at random speeds when compared with 510 Series

    http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/359?vs=357

    In everyday usage, random speeds is what counts as that is what your usage mainly consists of. If sequential speeds were more important, then HDs would still be fine as they offer decent sequential speeds but horrible random speeds. It's also worth it to note that random speeds do not scale up when RAIDed so in this area, you won't gain a huge performance increase by using RAID 0.

    510 Series uses Marvell controller so I would actually claim that it is not as reliable as 320 Series which uses Intel's own controller (same that is used in X25-M G2 series). The same Marvell controller is used in Crucial/Micron C400/M4 SSDs and the previous generation C300 lineup used a Marvell controller as well, albeit not the same. While Crucial's SSDs are not unreliable, I wouldn't say they are as reliable as Intel so due to this, I would again recommend the 320 Series for reliability.
     

Share This Page