Resolved SSD upgrade advice

Discussion in 'Mac Pro' started by phoenixsan, Apr 9, 2013.

  1. phoenixsan, Apr 9, 2013
    Last edited: Apr 21, 2013

    phoenixsan macrumors 65816

    phoenixsan

    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2012
    #1
    Hello all....!

    So a friend of mine brings me a Mac Pro Quad Core 3.33 (Nehalem, 2009) with the goal of update it with a SSD. Being cautious, I offer him to get advice in what route is better: internal SSD or a external enclosure with the SSD. The external have the advantages that he can move the SSD and we dont have to tinker with the internals (anyway, if have to be done, I feel capable). Internal SSD sounds to me as faster. So I am here asking for advice in these questions:

    a)- Internal SSD or external enclosure with the SSD. What do you prefer and why?

    b)- Either the internal or external SSD, what options we have? Brands, models you recommend and why? Have a budget of $275, but no tight....:D

    Thanks you all for reading this and for the advice.

    :):apple:
     
  2. tgurske macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Sep 2, 2008
    #2
    Always do internal unless you can't for some reason. Go on newegg dot com and look at which SSDs have the most reviews and do some research there.

    I upgraded to an SSD and the speed increase was stunning. After upgrading, you realize how much time you used to spend waiting on the old HD.
     
  3. seveej macrumors 6502a

    seveej

    Joined:
    Dec 14, 2009
    Location:
    Helsinki, Finland
    #3
    a) Definitely internal. Have the user check how much space he should get (YMMV), but IMHO, the benefit with an SSD in a MP is that you only really need the SSD for OS, Apps (and high throughput data, like the latest AV project), so it necessarily does not have to be that big... My MP uses a 120 GB SSD (OCZ Vertex 2), and that is more than sufficient. The real speed advantage of the SSD comes in the small files, especially on a MP, which is still limited to SATA II.

    b) Considering that MP's still are SATA II, there are two considerations: 1) it's useless to pay for a SSD, which is faster than the data bus. 2) there have been reports of compatibility problems with some SATA III -drives, so either use a vendor with a good return policy or get some customer testimonials from MP -users.

    RGDS,
     
  4. Tesselator, Apr 10, 2013
    Last edited: Apr 10, 2013

    Tesselator macrumors 601

    Tesselator

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2008
    Location:
    Japan
    #4

     
  5. GP-SE macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2013
    #5
    Get an internal SSD, I Suggest:
    Samsung 840 Pro, either 128GB or 256GB

    Install the OS and Programs on the SSD, then use a mechanical hard drive for music, documents, pictures, etc.
     
  6. Giuly macrumors 68040

    Giuly

    #6
    With $275, you're in for a 256GB Samsung 840 Pro or a 256GB OCZ Vector. The 840 Pro is slightly faster on paper, but the OCZ Vector has a more consistent performance delivery (it doesn't slow down as much during usage). Pick your poison.
     
  7. phoenixsan thread starter macrumors 65816

    phoenixsan

    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2012
    #7
    Thanks.....

    all for the input/advice. My friend have an assortment of Macs and 2 PCs. Ideally, he would love to be capable to move data between machines, but it is not a must. So, I think we can go with internal SSD. Have a lot of programs so I think we can use the SSD for OS and Apps, as suggested. Would like to hear more about the opinions between the Samsung 840 and the OCZ.

    Thanks again for your posts and suggestions.....:D


    :):apple:
     
  8. Tesselator, Apr 10, 2013
    Last edited: Apr 10, 2013

    Tesselator macrumors 601

    Tesselator

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2008
    Location:
    Japan
    #8
    Yeah just putting the machines all on the same ethernet hub will give him about 12MB/s in 100BASE-TX and around 120MB/s over 1,000BASE-TX.

    For the drive comparisons see:
    http://www.tomshardware.com/charts/...=on&prod[5905]=on&prod[5833]=on&prod[5836]=on

    Or for just the two you name:
    http://www.tomshardware.com/charts/ssd-charts-2012/compare,2786.html?prod[6007]=on&prod[5943]=on
     
  9. sarthak macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Nov 19, 2012
    Location:
    Canada
    #9
    Depends on where you are. If you look for one on sale, you might be able to get a 480GB SSD for that price. Although it may cap at around 300MB/s it's still greater than what the SATA2 connection can handle on the MP.

    I personally have an Agility 4 128GB SSD which gives me ~260 R/W.
     
  10. Giuly macrumors 68040

    Giuly

    #10
    I forgot the that Mac Pro is SATA-II only without a RAID card. In that case, your best bet is using two 128GB SanDisk Ultra Plus, which are on SATA-II about as fast as the Samsung 840 Pro but cost $100 each, and RAID0 them for performance that rivals that of the best 256GB SATA-III SSDs, yet being less expensive overall.

    That is if you have two empty internal bays.
     
  11. phoenixsan thread starter macrumors 65816

    phoenixsan

    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2012
    #11
    Would be nice....

    and like the suggestion of a Ethernet hub. My friend almost live in the Rock Age. Only have a cablemodem and he connects each machine to it with a Ethernet cable, depending in what computer he uses.....:eek:

    Will check the link with the comparison. But if we can save some money in the SSD upgrade, I will be very pleased to contribute with a bit of $ and time to get a decent hub up and working.

    Thanks for the hub suggestion....:D

    :):apple:
     
  12. RAMtheSSD macrumors member

    RAMtheSSD

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2013
    Location:
    High on a Mountain Looking for Wisdom
    #12
    Another Option

    Although, I agree with a number of the suggestions presented here -in particular, two 128gb SSDs in RAID 0 = Super Mac- the fastest any SATA 2 (3gb/s) can not hold a candle to a PCIe 2 SSD. Unless my video card fails over the next 3-6 months, I will be getting just such an SSD from OWC.
    As far as I know, it can not be partitioned for bootcamp but the speed difference is beyond anything I have ever seen! The fact that it is upgradable is a big selling point for me. Right now, my average processor load does not justify the upgrade from the two 2.26 E5520s; however, it is very very clear from both the Geekbench-64 and, even more so, from Windows 7, that the hard drives are holding me back.

    SSDs are not as robust as one might imagine. Certainly, they are not wilting flowers but drop it three or four times and oops! it will be history. If the external drive was going through an eSATA port on all of the machines that you would like to use it on then, it might be worth the risk. However, I have found that one small SSD for the OS and apps does wonders and some of the smaller ones are going for less than an 8gb stick of ram for the Mac Pro so why not put one on every machine? True, I do not know what your money situation is; nevertheless, moving it is just not a good idea.

    The Ethernet idea is probably the best overall way although I am a fan of NAS and would rather have that than a direct connection between the machines. That way, a file can be moved from machine x into the NAS once and then to the other machines as needed.

    Hope this helps - perhaps you might post a before and after Geekbench score on the Geekbench thread?

    ----------


    Aren't there two eSATA ports on the motherboard? I've heard that there are but just never looked -even when I could have :eek:

    So, could one not put one drive in the spare optical drive bay and one behind the video card and then the two SSD's on the standard ports?:eek:
     
  13. Tesselator macrumors 601

    Tesselator

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2008
    Location:
    Japan
    #13
    That's good sound logic right there. Two 128GB drives is better suited to MacPro than one 256GB unit. And two 256GB units better than one 512GB drive! Doing this you'll have twice the small-file I/O speeds for the ultimate app and OS performance and also the 600MB/s I/O for the large stream I/O. The one drawback with this solution is that the OSX Installer will not create and maintain the OS Recovery partition - so you'll have to back up and maintain (a bootable) one by hand.



    Sure. Yeah hubs are cool. Routers too but a little more expensive. The Mac Pro has two dedicated 1,000BASE-TX ports. If he connects one to the cable modem and one to a hub and then connects the other machines to the same hub he can both define&share network volumes from each of the machines and also set the MacPro to Share Internet so that all the machines can have access to the internet simultaneously. With this configuration however the MacPro needs to be turned on to supply internet to the other machines. And this is where a router comes in. The router can "share" the internet with all the boxes itself so that the MacPro can be turned off.

    You can also plug the cable modem directly into the hub to be accessed by each machine but I suck at networking and there's more detailed setup to get this configuration optimized. A good 1,000BASE-TX. 8 port hub can be as cheap as $50. A good enough Router is three or four times that.
     
  14. phoenixsan thread starter macrumors 65816

    phoenixsan

    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2012
    #14
    Got a deal in...

    a OCZ Vector (256 GB). Installed the OS and the Apps in the SSD and the Mac Pro shows a noticeable improvement in speed. Would do the hub thing later, as Tesselator has suggested.

    Thanks all for the suggestions/advice.:D

    :):apple:
     

Share This Page