What SSD? MBP 2010

Discussion in 'MacBook Pro' started by mpt-matthew, Sep 16, 2012.

  1. mpt-matthew macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2010
    #1
    First, I realise that there are many SSD forum posts, but the market updates regally so I want to get up-to-date answers.

    I have a MBP Summer 2010, I want to get an SSD for it to speed stuff up.
    I need one with around 500GB.
    I don't mind paying a little extra for quality and reliability.

    The two options i have looked at were the samsung and intel SSDs.
    The Samsung 512GB, which is easily available on Amazon.
    And the Intel 480GB, which is available from eBay.

    The intel is a little faster on paper than the samsung. Will I notice this?

    Any advice would be appreciated.
     
  2. LeeM macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2012
    #2
    at those speeds you wont notice it. id go samsung, but thats because ive got one
     
  3. mpt-matthew thread starter macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2010
    #3
    Owc ocz?

    Anyone finding compatibility or firmware issues with either of these drives.
    And what are OWC, crucial or OCZ like compared to Intel or Samsung?
     
  4. clyde2801 macrumors 601

    clyde2801

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2008
    Location:
    In the land of no hills and red dirt.
    #5
    Your macbook has sata 2, which means that the connection won't keep up with either of the ssd's you're interested in. OTOH, either could be upgraded to a faster computer later on.

    Have you gone to 8 gb of ram on your MBP yet? That will probably make the biggest difference.
     
  5. Zedsdead185 macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2006
    Location:
    UK
    #6
    As the previous poster has stated, they maybe good ssd's, but you won't get the full benefit of them in your macboop pro due to it being manufactured in 2010 and only using a sata 2 interface. This means it can do transfer data between the motherboard and the internal storage device at speeds up to 3.0gb/s and since those SSD's are optimized for 6.0gb/s you would not be getting the full benefit. I have a mid 2009 MBP which uses sata 2 at 3.0gb/s as well, and I went for the crucial v4. These have been made specifically for laptops which are still using 3.0gb/s so buyers don't end up wasting more money than they need on an ssd that won't use to its full potential.

    Edit: I meant to add also that the v4 was still a fantastic upgrade from my 5400rpm hdd. It literally only takes moments too boot up.

    Also, a memory upgrade would be very beneficial...
     
  6. jasonbro macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jul 22, 2011
    #7
    If i were you i'd get the 128gb SAMSUNG 830 SSD that just was down to 94 bucks on new egg, get a 10 dollar HD caddy off ebay, move the stock HD to the opical bay and set up OSX to put the user folder and all your documents on the HDD. Applications go on the SSD.

    It's a cheaper more effective solution at the expense of the CD drive.
     
  7. Irock619 macrumors 68000

    Irock619

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2011
    Location:
    San Francisco, CA
    #8
  8. T5BRICK macrumors 604

    T5BRICK

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2006
    Location:
    Oregon
    #9
    The Crucial M4 and Samsung 830 are both great drives and are both available in 512GB models.

    I wouldn't worry too much if the drives are SATA III, but you'll be stuck at SATA II speeds on your MBP.

    I paid $165 for the 256GB M4 on my mid 2009. I've seen it sell for less than the slower V4. Both the 256GB and 512GB M4 drives have been going on sale a lot recently.
     
  9. Freyqq macrumors 68040

    Joined:
    Dec 13, 2004
    #10
    I have the same computer, and I got the samsung 830. Works great!
     
  10. derbothaus macrumors 601

    derbothaus

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2010
    #11
  11. mpt-matthew thread starter macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2010
    #12
    Thanks for notifying me that the 2010 model only has SATAII.

    I looked at the Crucial V4 specs, and it shows a slower R/W speeds compared to the intel SATAII model.

    Surely all SATAII SSDs should have the same R/W speed as the technology is now limited by the connection, not the drive?
     
  12. derbothaus macrumors 601

    derbothaus

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2010
    #13
    Read the guide above. It will answer or link you to all you question.
     
  13. mpt-matthew thread starter macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2010
    #14
    Haha you posted as i was typing the question.
    Thanks for the guide, it looks pretty useful :)
     
  14. T5BRICK macrumors 604

    T5BRICK

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2006
    Location:
    Oregon
    #15
    I agree. It's not that much of a difference price wise between SATA II and III drives, but as an example, the 4K read and write speed on the Crucial M4 vs the V4 is far superior.
     
  15. Hammie macrumors 65816

    Hammie

    Joined:
    Mar 17, 2009
    Location:
    Wash, DC Metro
    #16
    I have the 17" mid-2010 and installed dual Crucial M4 512GB drives.

    Even thought I don't benefit from the SATA III speeds, it is nice to know that they are there in the event I upgrade to a machine that will benefit them.

    I am not running RAID, instead I have one for my main drive. The other drive for my media files (photography mostly). Right now they each have around 150GB used.

    I have had zero issues with the M4 drives. My machine, however, is like a whole new computer. Very fast and responsive. :D
     
  16. mpt-matthew thread starter macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2010
    #17
    I already do this, but with two HDDs (giving me about 800GB internal).
    I have my iTunes library on one (which is around 350GB, including films).
    And then on my faster drive i have my OS, programs, and aperture thumbnails and previews (which take up around 130GB), I then store the masters on an external drive.
     
  17. MaxPower72 macrumors 6502

    MaxPower72

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2012
    Location:
    Chicago, Illinois, Crooks County
    #18
    me too
     

Share This Page