SSD choices for Early 2010 MacbookPro update

Discussion in 'MacBook Pro' started by Irosaki, Jan 10, 2010.

  1. Irosaki macrumors member

    Irosaki

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2010
    Location:
    Sunderland, UK
    #1
  2. Gabriel GR macrumors 6502a

    Gabriel GR

    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2009
    Location:
    Athens, Greece
    #2
    I only have experience with the SSD made by intel. And it's simply amazing.
     
  3. BeamWalker macrumors 6502

    BeamWalker

    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2009
    #3
    I guess if they work, all of 'em are pretty cool, because even the "slow" ssd's are faster than HDD's.

    I really like the Super Talent Ultradrive GX. I have experience with the 128GB model. It is a very fast drive. You'd need to check that you get the latest firmware though. They had some issues in the beginning.
     
  4. briancl macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2010
    #4
    Keep in mind that OS X does not support TRIM, so whatever drive you purchase should be somewhat resistant to the common performance degradation seen over long usage periods.

    The Intel drives recommended above are pretty good without TRIM.
     
  5. Nano2k macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2009
    Location:
    Europe
    #5
    SSDs are all about the controller that is inside them. True that all will be way faster than a regular hdds, but there are big differences between these controllers. Intel are like the best so far I think.

    Check reviews before buying and when there are 2 of the same brand and one is cheaper than the other for the same capacity, ask yourself why..
     
  6. Irosaki thread starter macrumors member

    Irosaki

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2010
    Location:
    Sunderland, UK
    #6
    So would an SSD that supports TRIM still work in Mac OS X and just not use TRIM?

    and thanks, Ill take a look at intel, I believe Samsung use their own chips and controllers.
     
  7. JamesGorman macrumors 65816

    JamesGorman

    Joined:
    Dec 31, 2008
    Location:
    Winnipeg
    #7
    intel may be pricey, but they are by far the best.
     
  8. gfiz macrumors 6502

    gfiz

    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2009
    Location:
    Virginia
    #8
    Crucial C300 is supposed to be available in February, and i believe it will have garbage collection which is non-OS specific, and the speed previews have it above the X-25 G2. I'm in the same boat btw, will be buying a new MBP on the next refresh (though I still love my 12" PB) and right now the X-25 is my drive, but will be watching very closely for the release of both the crucial and Vertex2 Pro
     
  9. briancl macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2010
    #9
    TRIM is an optional command that the OS can issue to the drive. The drive works just fine without the command, but there will be performance degradation over time.

    Maybe the newest MBP refresh will include SSD options that support TRIM, and then Apple will include it in OS X.
     
  10. lord patton macrumors 65816

    lord patton

    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2005
    Location:
    Chicago
    #10
    The intel SSDs are the best for everything but sequential writes.

    For everything there is to know about SSDs—short of being an engineer designing them—go to anandtech.com and read their 4 or 5 articles on the subject.

    Anyway, choose Intel or anything based on an Indilinx controller.
     
  11. Irosaki thread starter macrumors member

    Irosaki

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2010
    Location:
    Sunderland, UK
    #11
  12. dvdhsu macrumors 6502a

    dvdhsu

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2008
    Location:
    Palo Alto, CA
    #12
    What's your price range?

    The fastest are the OCZ Vertex 2 Pro, if you keep up with benchmarks.
     
  13. Thunder82 macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2008
    Location:
    Chicago, IL
    #13
    I've had the "non-mac" version of this drive in my MBP and it was great. I'm not sure how different the mac version could really be. Great overall drive - although as others have already mentioned, Intel Drives are by far the best.
     
  14. coast1ja macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2009
    #14
    I would highly recommend the OCZ Vertex drives. The only difference in the Mac edition is the formatting of the drive from the factory. You can change the file system quite easily, so do not be afraid to buy a regular vertex.

    I also recommend the 256gb Kingston SSD Now V+ drive. I posted a thread with my xbench results before and after on a 2.66 MBP. It made the entire system 33% faster.
     
  15. Thunder82 macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2008
    Location:
    Chicago, IL
    #15
    Weren't these just announced at CES a few days ago? Someone actually has their hands on one for benchmarks? link?
     
  16. dvdhsu macrumors 6502a

    dvdhsu

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2008
    Location:
    Palo Alto, CA
    #16
    Nuh-uh. See below.
    Here.

    Compared to a HDD, that isn't much.
    The OCZ Vertex Pro 2 is around 500% faster than traditional HDDs.
     
  17. seepel macrumors 6502

    seepel

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2009
    #17
    I've got an OCZ Vertex MAC Edition in my white Macbook 2,1 and an Intel X25-M G2 in my mid 2009 Macbook Pro. Intel really beats the OCZ as far as write speed goes, but the OCZ has faster reads. I've only been running my Macbook Pro for a few weeks, and of course this is purely subjective but I think the OCZ fairs better in terms of real world performance. And keep in mind the white Macbook only has a SATA 1.5 controller. I'm definitely a big fan of the OCZ Indilinx controller.
     
  18. CTechKid macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2008
    #18
  19. Thunder82 macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2008
    Location:
    Chicago, IL
    #19
    I suppose I stand corrected, but even anandtech mentions that these drives will be psychotically expensive. We'll just have to wait until March to see how everything pans out.
     
  20. dvdhsu macrumors 6502a

    dvdhsu

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2008
    Location:
    Palo Alto, CA
    #20
    Oh, of course.
    Sorry, I wasn't trying to make it an argument. :D

    But yeah, they are expensive. If you can add on high quality memory, it'll be even faster, but you'll be breaking the $1,000 barrier, as well as requiring SATA 3.0 (6GBPS)
     
  21. seepel macrumors 6502

    seepel

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2009
    #21
    Sorry to get off topic, but this post made me think of this. These SATA specifications have gotten confusing since the unofficial adoption of SATA 3Gb/s = SATA II. Now SATA 3.0 = SATA 6 Gb/s? So if someone says simply SATA 3.0 there's no way to know what they're talking about. And to clear up a little more confusion 6GB/s = 48 Gb/s. GB is a Gigabyte, where as Gb is a Gigabit. Bytes/Bits can get muddled if we're all not careful.
     
  22. Ava's Meeshee macrumors member

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2010
    #22
    Is it common knowledge that the SSD's configurable with MBPs through Apple are a terrible value; I'm seeing purchasing third-party SSD's being taken for granted around here?
     
  23. briancl macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2010
    #23
    This is the conventional wisdom today. However, Apple may change the SSD's offered during this next refresh. All bets are off until we see the hardware and test it.
     
  24. seepel macrumors 6502

    seepel

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2009
    #24
    In general I think if you're going to get an SSD you might as well spend a bit more and get a good one, like the OCZ Vertex or the Intel X25-M G2. The Apple SSDs are a bit cheaper, but they use a Samsung Controller (Which is generally considered to be inferior), so you probably get what you pay for.
     
  25. bighill89 macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2010
    #25
    Whatever you do, don't buy a Kingston product. I bought the Kingston SNV125-S2BN/128GB and it died within a week.

    I constantly hear Intel makes the best SSDs.
     

Share This Page