SSD recommendations for a MacBook Pro (Late 2008)?

Discussion in 'MacBook Pro' started by Undecided, Jun 18, 2016.

  1. Undecided macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2005
    Location:
    California
    #1
    Does anyone have any recommendations for an SSD for a MacBook Pro (Late 2008)? It's only a SATA II (3.0 Gb/s) interface, so it's easy to have something that's overkill.
     
  2. Zuck7787 macrumors member

    Zuck7787

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2014
    Location:
    New Jersey
    #2
    I swapped out my MacBook Pro and my wife's MacBook hard drives with this one from Samsung... I believe I got it on sale back in January for a little cheaper... Most likely overkill but we both definitely noticed a difference in performance/boot up time As well

    But here's a link

    Samsung 850 EVO 250GB 2.5-Inch SATA III Internal SSD (MZ-75E250B/AM) https://www.amazon.com/dp/B00OAJ412U/ref=cm_sw_r_cp_api_LCEzxb5XE33F6
     
  3. Samuelsan2001 macrumors 604

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2013
    #3
    Your cheapest option will be the bx200 range from crucial I expect but just about any modern SSD should be fine for you.
     
  4. JTToft macrumors 68040

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2010
    Location:
    Aarhus, Denmark
    #4
    - Those are also the slowest SSDs in existence. Even on SATA II it will be terrible for any file transfers above a few GBs.
     
  5. Samuelsan2001 macrumors 604

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2013
    #5
    It'll still boot fast open apps fast and feel snappy, for general use on an 8 year old laptop it will make very little difference.
     
  6. robo456 macrumors 6502

    robo456

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2008
    Location:
    New Jersey
    #6
    Second vote for Samsung EVOs!

    I have one in my early 2009 whitebook along with 4gb and it's actually still a very usable machine...

    --rob
     
  7. Fishrrman macrumors G4

    Fishrrman

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2009
    #7
    I'd avoid Samsung.
    Get a Sandisk Plus or a Crucial.
    The cheapest available.
    Speed is of no importance (all should yield pretty much identical read/write speeds due to the limitations of the SATA-2 bus).
     
  8. JTToft macrumors 68040

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2010
    Location:
    Aarhus, Denmark
    #8
    - Correct before the comma. But if general use includes file transfers above about 2 GB, a BX200 vs. a fast SSD will make a quite large difference.

    - Really not true. The BX200 has so poor sequential write performance (around 60-80 MB/s) that it doesn't even come close to maxing out SATA II.
     
  9. treekram macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Nov 9, 2015
    Location:
    Honolulu HI
    #9
    Your MBP likely has the NVidia MCP79 SATA chipset. You can check by going into the System Information app, under Hardware -> SATA ... The name of the chipset appears on the right side. (If you don't know how to open System Information, go into Spotlight and type it in.)

    If you do have the MCP79 chipset, some SSD's don't work well or at all with it. Recent Crucial's (those generally available) and the Evo 850 are known to work (albeit at SATA2 speeds) with the MCP79. There are issues with some SanDisk SSD's (Ultra, Plus) but a poster in another thread said the X300 and X400 SSD's work. If you want to get a SanDisk, do a web search for the model name and "nvidia mcp79" before buying.

    What size SSD are you looking at and what are you willing to spend?
     
  10. Undecided thread starter macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2005
    Location:
    California
    #10
    The 200-250gb range, ~$100 or so. This is for a relative who is not particularly tech savvy (at all) but is short tempered and gets frustrated with technology (and doesn't have money to spend on an up to date machine). I figured I could swap out the current 5400 rpm drive and get him an SSD to give a boost in performance.

    It's only SATA II so Crucial may be fine. What's the difference between MX200 and BX200?
    --- Post Merged, Jun 23, 2016 ---
    Meanwhile, I have another relative who may want to put an SSD in a 2007 MacBook, which only has SATA I. I figure I would suggest swapping out the 5400 rpm drive with an SSD so that using the Mac just feels faster.
     
  11. JTToft macrumors 68040

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2010
    Location:
    Aarhus, Denmark
    #11
    - As I've discussed, the BX200 is very slow for file transfers. Slower than some hard drives. But for other tasks and general use not including file transfers, it's perfectly fast and provides the SSD advantage. MX200 is much faster.

    Samsung 850 EVO can also be found for under $100.
     
  12. jerryk, Jun 23, 2016
    Last edited: Jun 23, 2016

    jerryk macrumors 68030

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2011
    Location:
    SF Bay Area
    #12
    On Amazon, MX200 is $80 , BX200 is $65, Evo 850 is $99.

    I have MX200 in a couple of machines and they are pretty quick.
     
  13. Undecided thread starter macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2005
    Location:
    California
  14. Undecided thread starter macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2005
    Location:
    California
    #14
    Just ordered the Samsung 850 EVO - 250GB. His current drive is 5400 rpm and only SATA I (1.5gbps) so this should be a huge improvement.
     
  15. maflynn Moderator

    maflynn

    Staff Member

    Joined:
    May 3, 2009
    Location:
    Boston
    #15
    Definitely will be, I remember when I first changed out a HD to a SSD, and boy, was I shocked at how fast that bad boy booted up.

    The Evo is a good SSD, good luck :)
     
  16. Undecided thread starter macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2005
    Location:
    California
    #16
    And I guess I should use the trimforce command to manually enable trim support.
     
  17. JTToft macrumors 68040

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2010
    Location:
    Aarhus, Denmark
    #17
    - Yup.
     
  18. Undecided thread starter macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2005
    Location:
    California
    #18
    So I installed it this weekend and everything is working but there were a couple of hiccups.

    I wasn't sure at what point to enable TRIM support. I did it right after formatting the drive. I had some trouble too - I could use sudo on his login because he is just a standard user, so I had to switch to an admin account and run it. It seemed to work OK but it wasn't clear if it was per-device, per-user, or just a one time global thing. I confirmed in system profiler that trim is enabled.

    Carbon Copy Cloner didn't clone the whole drive; it cloned the main partition. So I had to separately tell CCC to also create the recover HD partition. I discovered this because it wouldn't let me turn on FileVault without the recovery partition.

    His Mac seems to have some trouble auto-restarting, such as after enabling TRIM and enabling FileVault. Turning the functions on would work but the restart wouldn't. I would have to force it.

    Anyway, it's about 20 times faster now. Still a far cry from my 2015 15" MBP. :)

    AJA.jpg AJA-SSD.jpg BM.jpg BM-SSD.jpg
     
  19. JTToft macrumors 68040

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2010
    Location:
    Aarhus, Denmark
    #19
    - It is a one time global thing on the OS X installation. Once it's done it's done and enabled for all SSDs attached.
    If System Profiler confirms, all's well.

    - Yes, that's the way it works. When cloning, you're selecting a volume ("Macintosh HD" presumably), and that volume doesn't contain the OS X Recovery partition. However, after a successful clone of the main volume, CCC will ask if you would also like the recovery partition cloned.

    - All resolved now?
     

Share This Page