SSD for 2009 MacBook 13"

Discussion in 'MacBook Pro' started by lukekarts, Jul 4, 2011.

  1. lukekarts macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2009
    #1
    (the earlier Alu one, before they called them all Pro's).

    Spec - C2D 2.06ghz, 4gb RAM, 160gb 5400rpm HDD, 9400M GT

    Anyway, my gf picked up a Macbook air recently and I'm amazed by the speed of the SSD in particular... which has me tempted to buy one for my Macbook. A few q's...

    1. Will I notice a huge speed jump? I appreciate the MBP isn't optimised in the same way...
    2. Is it worth the money?
    3. I've researched a bit into installing them, looks quite straightforward, but how do I go about cloning to the new SSD?
    3. Is it worth buying a crucial M4 w/ transfer kit? I am tempted because it's only £15 more for the cable/disc.

    Thanks for the replies :)
     
  2. Hellhammer Moderator

    Hellhammer

    Staff Member

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2008
    Location:
    Finland
    #2
    1. In certain tasks, yes. All tasks that include disk access will be sped up.

    2. Some say yes, others say no. Depends on your usage and what capacity do you need.

    3. Get a 2.5" enclosure, put the SSD in it and then use e.g. CCC to clone.

    4. What does the kit include?
     
  3. NutsNGum macrumors 68030

    NutsNGum

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2010
    Location:
    Glasgow, Scotland
    #3
    CCC is Carbon Copy Cloner, by the way. It's excellent.
     
  4. GermanyChris macrumors 601

    GermanyChris

    Joined:
    Jul 3, 2011
    Location:
    Here
    #4
    When I was in contact with the OCZ guru's while having some issues, one of the first things they said was do not use a clone on a SSD. My speed increased dramatically after a reformat and clean install. Take that for what it's worth. If I can find the email correspondence on the big Mac I'll repost it if you like.

    Do I believe that SSD are worth it, yes.

    Yes you will notice a dramatic speed jump in general use.

    Installation is easy, if you don't need your optical just use the ebay "optibay" and leave the HDD in there. I have heard that some Mac's will not boot from the optical, but mine does.
     
  5. lukekarts thread starter macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2009
    #5
    Thanks for the quick replies.

    The transfer kit includes SuperDuper! CD and a USB to SATA cable.

    Am I right in thinking any 2.5' SSD should work in this? Any brands in particular that are recommended, if I use an enclosure & CCC?

    Best bang for buck would appear to be the OCZ Onyx 2 240GB 2.5", but the tech specs look lower.

    The enclosure actually looks like a good option, as I can then use my old HDD as an external drive.
     
  6. Hellhammer Moderator

    Hellhammer

    Staff Member

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2008
    Location:
    Finland
    #6
    Intel 320 Series is fast and the most reliable according to studies. Reasonably priced as well.
     
  7. GermanyChris macrumors 601

    GermanyChris

    Joined:
    Jul 3, 2011
    Location:
    Here
    #7
    yes all can be used just remember to reformat it.

    After some teething issues, my vertex 2 has been great. If I were to do this again I would get one from OC though mainly because of firmware upgrade circumstances which you can read about on the OCZ forums.
     
  8. Philflow macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    May 7, 2008
    #8
    OP, have you considered Seagate Momentus XT? Mine boots faster than some SSDs do on my MBP. It's a lot cheaper too.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ilB79hv6bfg


    There are no studies involving Intel 320. It has only been out ~ 3 months and, for what it's worth, they're already 4 bricked ones on Newegg.

    Samsung 470 and Intel X25-m did better.
     
  9. Hellhammer Moderator

    Hellhammer

    Staff Member

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2008
    Location:
    Finland
    #9
    The controller is the same as in X25-M G2. The only difference is the NAND (25nm vs 34nm). The studies show that Intel in general is the most reliable and OP has no use to get 510 Series.
     
  10. lukekarts thread starter macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2009
    #10
    Well, in the end I've opted for the Intel 320 160gb, found a great deal on it, and having read some of the reliability/compatibility issues with the OCZ stuff, I thought I'd go for the risk free option.

    It should have arrived today, I'll attach it to my new external enclosure, format and then CCC across to it, and let you guys know how it performs.
     
  11. Philflow, Jul 5, 2011
    Last edited: Jul 5, 2011

    Philflow macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    May 7, 2008
    #11
    I guess you're refering to the one french retailer's "study". That study didn't include all the RMAs that went directly to Intel. And it didn't include Samsung 470 at all.

    Personally I prefer looking at Newegg's reviews.

    Intel 320 has completely failed 4 times in the short time it's been selling. Samsung 470 which has been selling much longer has had 1 bricked drive.

    Intel 320 the most reliable SSD? yes in Intel's marketing brochures.

    Not that the Intel 320 is a bad drive though, its still heeps more reliable than any Sandforce product. But if you want the most reliable drive I say go for Samsung 470.
     
  12. Hellhammer Moderator

    Hellhammer

    Staff Member

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2008
    Location:
    Finland
    #12
    I'm not really buying you 1 bricked drive story:

    http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produ...rue&Keywords=(keywords)&Page=1#scrollFullInfo

    It's impossible to figure out what is the most reliable drive, so I'll eat my words about Intel being the most reliable for sure. I would say any SSD that has all or even most parts coming from in-house (controller, NAND etc) is reliable. This is proven by Intel, Samsung, Toshiba etc, all their SSDs are fairly reliable. OTOH, Intel 510 Series isn't that reliable anymore due to Marvell controller.
     
  13. Philflow macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    May 7, 2008
    #13
    I see one DOA there. No bricks. Correct me if I'm wrong.

    With bricked drives I mean first working fine then crashing.

    What I do see on that page is a lot of complaints about updating firmware.
    Agreed.

    It does look like Intel 320 might be slightly less reliable then Intel X25-m. But then again the Newegg reviews are not exactly scientific studies.

    25nm NAND is said to be more prone to errors than 34nm NAND.
     
  14. lukekarts thread starter macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2009
    #14
    Well I said I'd post back how it went, so here goes...

    Long night!

    I connected the Intel 320 (160gb) to the external SATA/USB connector, cloned across, took approx 90 mins to copy 108gb worth of data.

    Then, I spent a good 30 minutes trying to take out the old HDD, due to the screw on the retaining bracket being slightly worn (thanks Apple) and made out of a ridiculously soft metal. It was also in far too tight...

    Installed the new Intel drive, worked ok, but for whatever reason the performance wasn't there. I resolved a hanging issue at startup by ensuring the SSD was selected as the bootup disk, but startup was still slow (1 min) and performance a bit lacklustre. A google search suggested I try a fresh install, and as it was not too late, I went ahead.

    So, I tried again, reformatted the Intel SSD, and booted up with the OSX: SL disc, etc. Then I used 'Migration Assistant' to import all my data from Time Machine, and left my MacBook downloading the 1.5gb worth of updates overnight.

    The Result

    Wow.

    Startup time approx 14 seconds.
    Shutdown time approx 3 seconds.

    Massive boost in speed of opening apps, I'd say performance is almost identical to that of my gf's 13 inch (1.86ghz) MacBook Air.

    So it seems fresh install is definitely the way to go!
     
  15. GermanyChris macrumors 601

    GermanyChris

    Joined:
    Jul 3, 2011
    Location:
    Here
    #15
    Looks like the OCZ was right, just don't clone onto a SSD. Fresh install fixed all my problems.
     

Share This Page