SSD Buying Guide

[Weaselboy]

What problems? I heard that the intel 510 was more reliable than crucial M4 with the mac

The Intel 510 came out at the same time the early 2011 Macbook Pros did and this was the first Mac to have SATA III and the Intel 510 was the first Intel SSD with SATA III, so I think a lot of people jumped on that combination.

There was a fairly long thread here about people having beach balls etc with that setup, but the EFI (firmware) updates Apple released for that model Macbook Pro seemed to fix the problems the Intel 510 as well as other SATA III drives were having. Since the EFI updates I have not seen posts from users having trouble with the Intel 510.

Around the same time period there were threads discussing troubles with about every brand SATA III SSD you could buy, and they all seemed to kind of go away after the EFI updates.

----------

I haven't opened up my new 15" MBP as yet, and I plan on ordering a 256 GB SSD tonight to put in it. Is the best way to go about this simply to wait until I get it to start up the system and install everything? Or should I boot up now and then switch over when the drive arrives?

Also, at the risk of asking a question that's been asked already, where can I get the hardware to allow me to use the Superdrive bay for the original HDD?

I would use your machine now with the factory drive so if anything is wrong there won't be any issue with Apple saying it is caused by the SSD you installed. It won't really complicate your SSD install, you can just clone your data over to the new SSD.

Search for "Optibay" for the mounting bracket you want. I don't know which is best as I have not used this setup. There are other brands also you will see discussed if you search for that term.

 

[macchiato2009]

after reading reviews of the Samsung 810 SSD, and feedbacks here about the Intel 510, considering the recent issues of Crucial M4 (and the necessity of update the firmware), it seems like more reliable and safe to go for a Samsung or an Intel SSD

- Intel SSD: reliable, works fine, but a bit pricey
- Samsung: excellent bang for the buck, like Intel 510, no performance deterioration over time


clearly not the 2 fastest but the figures are purely max theorical transfer rates

i guess that to avoid beachballs or freezes, going for these 2 SSD is the the right choice

what do you think?

 

[Hellhammer]

Just curious, between Crucial M4 and Samsung 830 what would you recommend at the moment? I personally chose the Crucial for four reasons 1) When I got my MBP in late October the 830 wasn't out yet and Samsung still hadn't given a firm release date 2) I was afraid of going with a newly released drive that is somewhat untested 3) I've heard that Samsung can be difficult with RMAs and customer service in general and 4) Crucial's firmware updates are OS independent and work on Macs.

I'm not looking for a validation of my purchase as I'm already very pleased with the M4, just curious as to what your opinion is now that the 830 has been out for a little bit.

IMO it boils down to price. Both have their pros and cons (Samsung has GC but not Mac updater while Crucial has poorer GC but OS-independent updater). The Crucial BSOD thing should be an issue as it takes over 5000 hours of active use to happen. That's equal to 208 days of 24/7 on-time. The fix should also be here in less than two weeks.

My personal opinion still goes for Samsung. 470 Series was rock solid (I'm running a 64GB one myself) and the 830 seems to be as solid. Of course, issues may arise later like with Crucial M4, but I wouldn't worry.

And did you ever find out more about TLC-based SSDs?

Yes, a lot. The bad news first. We most likely won't see a TLC based SSD in Q1'12. Initially, OCZ said so but they have now changed their plans. They will get the technology ready in Q1'12 but the release will depend on market conditions. I.e. it makes no sense to release a TLC SSD unless it will be cheaper than MLC offerings.

I have a long article about this (and more) but Anand has yet to read it through and check that everything is right. Expect it after CES.

i guess that to avoid beachballs or freezes, going for these 2 SSD is the the right choice

what do you think?

I would add Crucial to the list because the issues will take over a half year to be even possible. The FW update should be here sooner.

 

[thefizzle657]

IMO it boils down to price. Both have their pros and cons (Samsung has GC but not Mac updater while Crucial has poorer GC but OS-independent updater). The Crucial BSOD thing should be an issue as it takes over 5000 hours of active use to happen. That's equal to 208 days of 24/7 on-time. The fix should also be here in less than two weeks.

My personal opinion still goes for Samsung. 470 Series was rock solid (I'm running a 64GB one myself) and the 830 seems to be as solid. Of course, issues may arise later like with Crucial M4, but I wouldn't worry.



Yes, a lot. The bad news first. We most likely won't see a TLC based SSD in Q1'12. Initially, OCZ said so but they have now changed their plans. They will get the technology ready in Q1'12 but the release will depend on market conditions. I.e. it makes no sense to release a TLC SSD unless it will be cheaper than MLC offerings.

I have a long article about this (and more) but Anand has yet to read it through and check that everything is right. Expect it after CES.



I would add Crucial to the list because the issues will take over a half year to be even possible. The FW update should be here sooner.

Have you heard anything about the life expectancy of TLC-NAND? I thought that I had read that we're talking about a lifespan of 1000 P/E cycles and that OCZ says that for the average consumer that means roughly 4 years of use before the drive can't be written to anymore. If that is the case I really hope that the entire industry doesn't adopt TLC, I would much rather spend more money on an MLC drive if it means that I don't have to worry about the thing dying so quickly. I already try to limit how much writing I do to the drive, I can't imagine what how paranoid I would be if my SSD had such a short life expectancy! Any plans for others (Crucial, Samsung, etc.) to move to TLC? I know they are talking about 20nm NAND but that still is supposed to last at least 3000 P/E cycles. Sorry for the all of the questions!

 

[macchiato2009]

anyone tried OWC Mercury Pro SSD with late 2011 MBP ?

 

[jon08]

anyone tried OWC Mercury Pro SSD with late 2011 MBP ?

I've had it for a little over a month now (I assume you're referring to Mercury Extreme Pro). So far so good.

 

[macchiato2009]

glad to hear that

i'll go for the OWC then


thanks

 

[Hellhammer]

Have you heard anything about the life expectancy of TLC-NAND? I thought that I had read that we're talking about a lifespan of 1000 P/E cycles and that OCZ says that for the average consumer that means roughly 4 years of use before the drive can't be written to anymore.

1000 P/E cycles is the number I've seen as well, though that doesn't mean much. What matters is the efficiency of the controller. 1000 cycles can be a lot, or it can be very few. Some controllers have lower write amplification (e.g. SandForce due to compression) which means the controller is efficient, there are as few writes as possible. Hence it will last longer with TLC NAND.

It's impossible to give a specific timeframe because the controller plays such a huge role, and that's when ignoring the usage totally. Also, the P/E cycles will depend on the manufacturer and the maturity of the process. I did contact Micron but as expected, they weren't willing to give out info on P/E cycles.

If that is the case I really hope that the entire industry doesn't adopt TLC, I would much rather spend more money on an MLC drive if it means that I don't have to worry about the thing dying so quickly. I already try to limit how much writing I do to the drive, I can't imagine what how paranoid I would be if my SSD had such a short life expectancy! Any plans for others (Crucial, Samsung, etc.) to move to TLC? I know they are talking about 20nm NAND but that still is supposed to last at least 3000 P/E cycles. Sorry for the all of the questions!

Pretty much all major SSD makers have played with in-house TLC samples. However, OCZ is the only one that has publicly announced any plans of such product. Personally, I wouldn't expect TLC to become very popular unless the controllers can be substantially improved. MLC will stay in production, that's for sure, and it will still be consumer orientated as SLC is needed for enterprise. I can see TLC in the low-end market but I wouldn't expect all OEMs to even adopt it. E.g. Intel have no plans for such SSD, at least according to their roadmaps.

 

[enklined]

In case anyone is interesed, newegg has the 120GB OCZ Vertex III on sale for $159 after MIR.

I'm debating picking one up myself.

 

[Toughbook]

As a user of laptops and desktops with Samsung 470's and 830's, and Intel's MLC & SLC, I can attest that I have NEVER had one problem with any of them. I have read several reviews from actual users, not reviewers that put the Intel's and Samsungs above all others in regards to reliability. They are all going to be fast, it's the reliability I need and want.

When I am hundred's of miles from civilization in extreme environments with my Toughbooks I have to have something that works. These have always done just that for me.

 

[livitup]

I hope this is a reasonable place to ask this...

I've not been aware of most of the really nitty-gritty details of SSDs until today, when I started reading articles on this subject, including many of the links in this thread. I have decided to pull the trigger and I want to buy a ~256GB SSD for my "Early 2011" 13 inch MBP running Lion. Even after all the reading I have done, I am unable to choose between 4 potential SSD models.

I use a variety of applications on my Mac, but usually the top ones are Propellerhead Reason, MS Office (Word and PowerPoint mainly) and the regular suite of Lion Internet applications: Mail.app, Safari, etc. From time to time I use Photoshop and Dreamweaver. I also have VMWare Fusion and run a few Windows applications in a Windows 7 VM.

I'm after the drastic speed improvement promised by SSDs. I want launching Word to go from 15 seconds to 2 seconds. But I'm not really interested in spending an extra $50 to make it load in 1.6 seconds. I am pretty technically astute, I'm familiar with the command line (I'm a Unix Admin at work) and I have access to a Windows machine to do firmware upgrades, if needed.

Given these criteria, can anyone suggest one of the four below as the "right" drive for me?

SAMSUNG 830 Series MZ-7PC256N/AM 2.5" 256GB SATA III MLC Internal Solid State Drive (SSD) 369.99
OCZ Agility 3 AGT3-25SAT3-240G 2.5" 240GB SATA III MLC Internal Solid State Drive (SSD) 299.99
OCZ Vertex 3 VTX3-25SAT3-240G 2.5" 240GB SATA III MLC Internal Solid State Drive (SSD) 344.99
Crucial m4 CT256M4SSD1 2.5" 256GB SATA III MLC 7mm Internal Solid State Drive (SSD) 364.99

All prices are current on NewEgg inclusive of rebates.

I guess I can boil most of this down to the following question... with my user profile in mind, am I going to see such marked improvement from one of the 3 higher priced models to eliminate the Agility 3?

Thanks!

 

[petrified]

Greetings!

Just wanted to get some input from you users out there. I have been out of touch for technology for about 2 years now since I started traveling and recently got myself a late 2011 MBP 15". I have been looking to get an SSD but am overwhelmed by the amount of choices and such.

After reading the guide at the start of this post, I have kinda narrowed it down to 120G SSDs, either the Vertex 3, OWC electra 6G, or the OWC extreme pro 6G. Any significant differences between the Vertex 3 & Max IOPS thou?

I was wondering if any users out there have any feedback on stability and speed on any of the drives?

I have to ship the OWC drives internationally as compared to having the vertex 3 readily available, but shipping the Vertex 3 in from amazon might actually be the cheapest option atm.

Also, is it more beneficial to have the SSD in the odd? If so, why?

Lastly, what are the odd solutions other than OWC Data Doubler? That rig seems kinda pricy.

I am not in a hurry to get an SSD and am just looking for user experiences, and for the SSD prices to drop(fingers crossed).

Thanks for the help!

Smiles,
J

 

[Hellhammer]

I guess I can boil most of this down to the following question... with my user profile in mind, am I going to see such marked improvement from one of the 3 higher priced models to eliminate the Agility 3?

Samsung 830 and Crucial M4 are actually slower than Agility 3. However, they are a lot more reliable. I would recommend the Samsung 830 even though it's the most expensive. Issues are never nice and can eat up dozens of potential works hours. If you want to save&pray, Agility 3 isn't a bad option.

I was wondering if any users out there have any feedback on stability and speed on any of the drives?

They are all based on SF-2281/2 controller. If you want stability and reliability, take a look at Intel, Samsung and Crucial.

Also, is it more beneficial to have the SSD in the odd? If so, why?

HD bay has shock protection for the HD, while the ODD doesn't.

Lastly, what are the odd solutions other than OWC Data Doubler? That rig seems kinda pricy.

There are many in eBay.

 

[mpaquette]

What size and type of tools do I need to open up my MBP and replace the HD? And what is a good online source for them?

 

[appleraj]

What size and type of tools do I need to open up my MBP and replace the HD? And what is a good online source for them?

http://eshop.macsales.com/item/OWC/TOOLKITMHD/

 

[Toughbook]

I hope this is a reasonable place to ask this...

I've not been aware of most of the really nitty-gritty details of SSDs until today, when I started reading articles on this subject, including many of the links in this thread. I have decided to pull the trigger and I want to buy a ~256GB SSD for my "Early 2011" 13 inch MBP running Lion. Even after all the reading I have done, I am unable to choose between 4 potential SSD models.

I use a variety of applications on my Mac, but usually the top ones are Propellerhead Reason, MS Office (Word and PowerPoint mainly) and the regular suite of Lion Internet applications: Mail.app, Safari, etc. From time to time I use Photoshop and Dreamweaver. I also have VMWare Fusion and run a few Windows applications in a Windows 7 VM.

I'm after the drastic speed improvement promised by SSDs. I want launching Word to go from 15 seconds to 2 seconds. But I'm not really interested in spending an extra $50 to make it load in 1.6 seconds. I am pretty technically astute, I'm familiar with the command line (I'm a Unix Admin at work) and I have access to a Windows machine to do firmware upgrades, if needed.

Given these criteria, can anyone suggest one of the four below as the "right" drive for me?

SAMSUNG 830 Series MZ-7PC256N/AM 2.5" 256GB SATA III MLC Internal Solid State Drive (SSD) 369.99
OCZ Agility 3 AGT3-25SAT3-240G 2.5" 240GB SATA III MLC Internal Solid State Drive (SSD) 299.99
OCZ Vertex 3 VTX3-25SAT3-240G 2.5" 240GB SATA III MLC Internal Solid State Drive (SSD) 344.99
Crucial m4 CT256M4SSD1 2.5" 256GB SATA III MLC 7mm Internal Solid State Drive (SSD) 364.99

All prices are current on NewEgg inclusive of rebates.

I guess I can boil most of this down to the following question... with my user profile in mind, am I going to see such marked improvement from one of the 3 higher priced models to eliminate the Agility 3?

Thanks!

Yes, you came to the correct place. If you can't ask it here, well, heck with them.

My opinion is based on almost 3 years of SSD use in several different model of computers. From a SATA I laptop to a desktop I built that is way to fast and big for me!

Think of a HDD or SSD as the engine in a very exotic, sporty car. That exotic car should have a very strong, reliable, efficient engine among other components. What good would all of the high technology in this car be with an engine that craps out when you least expect it or need it to?

This is why the reliability and dependability of an SSD is my #1 item. All the SSD's are going to be very fast. If one can read at 300 and the other at 400, believe me your not going to be able to feel the big difference. By looking at specs you will, but not by really using the laptop.

I hang out on a very large and very informed forum alot. You should check this place out and read away till your hearts content. Take a look at the forum threads, look at the lack of threads from owners of either Intel or Samsung models that have problems. They are just not there. A SandForce drive is by far the least reliable of the group. Facts are facts with that one.

Good luck and don't feel shy to ask away.

Check out this link.
http://forum.notebookreview.com/solid-state-drives-ssds-flash-storage/

 

[kraftzwerg]

Toughbook, may I ask you what your experience with the 512 GB Samsung 830 is? Reviews say it has exceptionally high power usage. Does this affect battery life noticeably in practice?

 

[KPOM]

Intel 320 Series had the 8MB bug, although a firmware update should have fixed it. 510 Series had problems with Macs but I'm not sure if those are still present.
Samsung is the most reliable SSD from what I have seen, plus it has decent garbage collection while Intel doesn't.

What are your thoughts about a Samsung 470 in a mid-2009 MacBook Pro (15" 2.8GHz Core 2 Duo)?

It's my mother's, and we're looking for a boost to give it some more life for another year or two. I'd say PowerPoint and iPhoto are the most used programs on it. Reliability is the top priority.

Originally, I purchased a 160GB Intel 320 Series at a Black Friday sale, but in the end we determined it didn't have enough storage. I can get a 256GB Samsung 470 (MZ-7PA256) for a reasonable price. How well have they held up? If I go with it, should I use the Terminal routines to activate TRIM, or is it not necessary? It seems to have good power usage. Does it make a noticeable improvement in battery life over the stock HDD?

Also, does anyone know if Apple would install the drive (even for a fee)? I was going to install the Intel drive myself when I was at my parents' place for the holidays, but that's not an option now. What about an authorized service provider? I think it still has another 6 months of AppleCare left on it.

 

[Toughbook]

Sorry for the delay. Been busy...

The 830 did not seem to increase my battery time by any significant time. However, I think this can be very user specific as well.

 

[nippyjun]

FYI: crucial has a new firmware for the M4 SSD's that fixes the recently found 5000 hour bug. It's version 0309.

 

[Hellhammer]

What are your thoughts about a Samsung 470 in a mid-2009 MacBook Pro (15" 2.8GHz Core 2 Duo)?

It's my mother's, and we're looking for a boost to give it some more life for another year or two. I'd say PowerPoint and iPhoto are the most used programs on it. Reliability is the top priority.

Originally, I purchased a 160GB Intel 320 Series at a Black Friday sale, but in the end we determined it didn't have enough storage. I can get a 256GB Samsung 470 (MZ-7PA256) for a reasonable price. How well have they held up? If I go with it, should I use the Terminal routines to activate TRIM, or is it not necessary? It seems to have good power usage. Does it make a noticeable improvement in battery life over the stock HDD?

Samsung 470 is definitely one of the most reliable SSDs that currently exist. It's been out for over a year and so far there have been zero, zero widespread issues. Most other SSDs are newer and can still get problems (e.g. Crucial M4). I have one in my PC and it's been rock solid, although I have owned it for only a few months.

I wouldn't activate TRIM as Samsung 470 seems to have a pretty good garbage collection. TRIM can always mix things up and especially if it's for your mother, fixing the issues may not be all that simple.

You might see a slight improvement in battery life but that depends on one's usage. I wouldn't expect more than max 30 mins though.

Also, does anyone know if Apple would install the drive (even for a fee)? I was going to install the Intel drive myself when I was at my parents' place for the holidays, but that's not an option now. What about an authorized service provider? I think it still has another 6 months of AppleCare left on it.

For a fee, they definitely will. They charge quite a lot though, I would expect something like $50-$100 (there's usually some kind of a starting fee plus an hourly rate, and the minimum is one hour of course). It's not that hard so maybe your father could do it. Just link him a tutorial and it should be fine.

 

[KPOM]

Samsung 470 is definitely one of the most reliable SSDs that currently exist. It's been out for over a year and so far there have been zero, zero widespread issues. Most other SSDs are newer and can still get problems (e.g. Crucial M4). I have one in my PC and it's been rock solid, although I have owned it for only a few months.

For a fee, they definitely will. They charge quite a lot though, I would expect something like $50-$100 (there's usually some kind of a starting fee plus an hourly rate, and the minimum is one hour of course). It's not that hard so maybe your father could do it. Just link him a tutorial and it should be fine.

Thanks. The Samsung 470 it is, then. It should be a nice boost from the stock HDD. I found an online installation guide with a video, so perhaps I'll just go that route. It looks pretty straightforward.

Do we know what SSDs Apple uses in the MacBook Pro? I know the Air uses Toshiba and Samsung.

 

[Hellhammer]

Do we know what SSDs Apple uses in the MacBook Pro? I know the Air uses Toshiba and Samsung.

Toshiba HG3. It has the same controller as the Toshiba SSD in MBA.

 

[FuNGi]

I would go with Samsung 470 series. Apple uses it in some MBAs and it has proven itself to be very reliable. FYI, I have a 64GB Samsung 470 in my PC as well.

If it's noticeably more expensive than e.g. Samsung 830 or Crucial M4, then you can consider them as well.
-snip-

I'm trying to decide between a 64GB Samsung SSD as well (for OS and apps). A 470 retails for $115 and the 830 can be found for $110 = Price is a non-issue.

Hellhammer, why recommend the 470 given the 830 has higher read speeds than the 470 (520/160 MBs vs. 250/170 read/write, respectively)? Or will this be an unnoticeably slower read time and the 470 is more reliable than the 830?

*I don't encode much video, just want faster boot times and image rendering etc.

links:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820147133
http://www.buy.com/pr/product.aspx?sku=218861813&sellerid=10001650

 

[KPOM]

Hellhammer, why recommend the 470 given the 830 has higher read speeds than the 470 (520/160 MBs vs. 250/170 read/write, respectively)? Or will this be an unnoticeably slower read time and the 470 is more reliable than the 830?

The 830 is capable of faster speeds only if your Mac or PC has a SATA III controller. If it has SATA II, then the 830 and 470 should have similar speeds.