Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

OMGwtfBBQwings

macrumors regular
Original poster
Jun 7, 2011
243
108
I'm about to purchase a macbook pro 13" i5 on on friday. I've decided that the 0.3ghz isnt really worth the extra £300 premium and that a RAM and more importantly a SSD upgrade would be more beneficial.

Here are two that i'm probably going to order simply because my friend used these and his same spec macbook is running smooth with no problems encountered.

Ram:

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Kingston-Technology-Apple-8GB-Kit/dp/B001PS9UKW/ref=sr_1_1?s=computers&ie=UTF8&qid=1316440317&sr=1-1

SSD: (this also has a handy enclosure which i can use my then old HDD as an external drive)

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Kingston-128GB-2-5inch-Notebook-bundle/dp/B004BP93FS/ref=sr_1_1?s=computers&ie=UTF8&qid=1316439946&sr=1-1


Just wanted to ask for advice from more season mac users on these items.
(ive been with windows for about 7years)

I know that perhaps the OCZ vertex is a better option but its also £70 more costlier which to a student is alot of pints of beers :D


Also, whilst scimming these forums, ive come across some users has problems with trim or whatever with some SSD's. will encounter these with my choice of SSD?




Thanks in advance
 
As an Amazon Associate, MacRumors earns a commission from qualifying purchases made through links in this post.
They are both fine.
but I would suggest you getting a bigger HDD as external since 128GB wouldnt be enough (well for me).

The Kingston SSD is good but I would prefer the Samsung 470 or Crucial M4.
Although there wouldnt be any problem with the kingston.
 
They are both fine.
but I would suggest you getting a bigger HDD as external since 128GB wouldnt be enough (well for me).

The Kingston SSD is good but I would prefer the Samsung 470 or Crucial M4.
Although there wouldnt be any problem with the kingston.

i have a 5 year vaio pc with 90gb which is enough so i think 128 would also be enough, besides 256gb ssd are too expensive at the moment for me.

which of the two(samsung and crucial) has better performace? sumsungs read write speeds are 230mbps 250mps where as the crucials seem to be 415mbps and 95mbps?
 
At the moment SATA 3 drives are generally more unstable than the SATA 2 drives, and more expensive as well. On top of that, the performance difference between a standard hard drive and a SATA 2 SSD is much bigger than the difference between SATA 2 and 3 SSDs.
 
Thanks, Samsung 470 128gb it is then.

are there any better ram sticks out there as well?
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.