Which has more bang for buck? SSD or 7200?

Discussion in 'MacBook Pro' started by raymondu999, Jul 21, 2009.

  1. raymondu999 macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2008
    #1
    Bang for buck wise which has a better speed to price ratio? I'm not talking about benchmarks, I'm talking about noticeable performance. I heard some people say that 5400 drives are so fast nowadays that even 7200 drives can sometimes be slower. Is this true?

    Also, if it's a 7200 drive, is it cheaper to BTO straight from Apple the 7200 drive? Rather than buy aftermarket? (bearing in mind that I don't need the space of the two drives, so if I buy aftermarket the old drive will end up being unused :rolleyes:)
     
  2. PhixionFilms macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2008
    Location:
    Deployed atm
    #2
    Your comparing apples with oranges.
    This is how you look at it. The SSD will BLOW any HDD out of the water in performance. BUT it will cost you your left arm, (seriously like $600+)
    If you are going to need performance and price is out of the question get the SSD, if not get the 7200 over the 5400 for performance.
    This is what i did, i bought the WD Scorpion Blue which is a 5400 and its amazingly fast for a 5400 drive. It was only 89.99 on sale. Im going to wait about 6-9 months, and the SSD will most likely drop half the price in that time.
     
  3. raymondu999 thread starter macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2008
    #3
    Ok, so here's my situation: I don't NEED SSD-like performance. But it'd be nice :D Now, 7200, performance/price, compared to SSD, performance/price. Which gives more? Also I heard 7200 drives heat up faster, make more noise, and consume battery faster? :confused:
     
  4. antskip macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2009
    Location:
    Australia
    #4
    1) a good SSD is now only 3X the cost of a HDD, and is far more than 3X faster (and also in other ways like power, heat, noise level, toughness etc) in real use that it is much more bang for the buck, IMHO. with new and cheaper intel SSD's coming out today the power-to-cost ratio of the SSD compared to the HDD is becoming ever greater. I can't imagine voluntarily going back to any HDD after using a SSD. It is like light and day.
    2) some 5400rpm HDD are faster than some 7200rpm HDD's. But, all other things being equal, a 7200rpm drive spins faster (and often has a bigger cache), and is generally about 10% quicker in real operation - as one would expect. Some high-density ("bigger") 5400rpm drives are as fast or faster than some 7200rpm drives, but mostly that is due to density-induced speed. e.g. a 500GB 5400rpm drive would probably be quicker in operation than a 80GB 7400rpm drive, but it generally should not be quicker than a 500GB 7200rpm drive. but in the end you have to try them put yourself - individually - though reviews can be of some help. e.g. http://www.techreport.com/articles.x/17010.

    I recently compared on the same system a Hitachi 7200rpm 160GB HDD, a WD Scorpio Blue 5400rpm 500GB HDD, and a OCZ Summit 120GB SSD, and for me, the 7200rpm was faster and quieter than the 5400rpm, but not in the same ball park as the SSD, which created an utterly silent machine. The HDD's are now external backup drives...You may have a different experience with particular HDD's...The SSD is revolutionary.
     
  5. guydude193 macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    May 15, 2009
    Location:
    MI
    #5
    Well, Intel's new drives (80GB version) is $225. But it's probably a smaller capacity than what you're using right now. If money isn't the biggest issue, and neither is space, then go with the 80GB.
     
  6. nightfly13 macrumors 6502a

    nightfly13

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2008
    Location:
    Ranchi, India
    #6
    +1 SSD is the value proposition. I went for a third option: an optibay-like optical bay adapter with a cheap 30GB Vertex SSD, and kept the stock 320GB drive for less demanding tasks (MKV movies, iTunes etc.)

    That said, new Intel pricing is pretty awesome. I also have a G1 Intel 80GB presently installed in an older MacBook - that thing is fast all of a sudden - and that's Core Duo, 1.5gb ram and other than my brand new SSD-powered MBP, it's the fastest laptop I've ever seen all of a sudden.

    Basically I'd say, Intel is the best option after the price drop, $225 for 80gb or double that for the 160GB unit. We think available next week from Newegg et all.

    The write speeds aren't life-changing, the initial installation won't be super fast, but then everything else will FLY!
     
  7. raymondu999 thread starter macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2008
    #7
    I don't really have massive needs with my computer, just that I travel a lot and I need a lot of space, but anything above say, 250 should suffice. Hence I was thinking either to go with 320GB Intel :D or a 500GB 7200 :p

    So yeah.

    I think the general consensus is that with the longer (albeit only slightly) battery life, the durability, and the speed increase is worth going SSD more? Maybe should I go with another brand of SSD and no need to go Intel if I don't NEED super blazing fast performance?

    Also one of the reasons I'm thinking about this is the issue with TRIM and garbage collection. Wouldn't the SSD slow down quite a bit after a while?
     
  8. admanimal macrumors 68040

    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2005
    #8
    The 320GB Intel SSD won't be out until next year, so your decision will also depend on how soon you want to do this.
     
  9. raymondu999 thread starter macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2008
    #9
    Probably with the release of the next Rev (Arrandale?) :D
     
  10. darkdream macrumors member

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2009
  11. Gabriel GR macrumors 6502a

    Gabriel GR

    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2009
    Location:
    Athens, Greece
    #11
    it really depends on what you call "bang"

    If massive storage is what you're after then the 7200rpm drive is for you.

    If you need very fast seeking and multitask heavily the SSD is not really a bargain but its performance is unmatched even by high-end desktop drives.

    Another advantage of the SSD is that its got no problem in vibrant environments where the HDD might skip and even fail.
     
  12. bamf macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2008
    #12
    I've got an Early 2008 MBP that I CTO'd a 200GB 7200 RPM drive. It's run great, but it's starting to feel a bit sluggish in the IO department. I'm going to be upgrading to a new X-25M to make the machine feel "faster". Now granted, I normally have 1 or 2 Fusion VMs up, plus any number of apps inside OS X as well. Standard hard drives are fine for most things, but an SSD is just so much quicker if you have the right type of usage pattern (I've got a Dell E6400 with an SSD and Windows 7).
     
  13. pnyc macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    May 12, 2007
    Location:
    Brooklyn, NY
    #13
    If you want storage capacity go with an HD. If you want speed, no vibrations and very low heat go with a SSD. To me the "bang" is worth it.
     
  14. guydude193 macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    May 15, 2009
    Location:
    MI
    #14
    Quite honestly, Intel's the only company that has gotten the whole SSD thing right.
     
  15. raymondu999 thread starter macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2008
    #15
    Ok, so let's put it this way. 250GB and above is enough storage for me. I could however opt for a bigger drive so I don't have to upgrade as early. I don't NEED blazing performance, but it would be nice. Budget isn't an issue. Make me a recommendation :D
     
  16. alphaod macrumors Core

    alphaod

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2008
    Location:
    NYC
    #16
    More bang for buck would be an HDD because you can get 500GB for only $100; to get that space in an SSD, you would be paying a premium these days. Also SSDs have limited life and are susceptible to static electricity and EMI (though these two are rather unlikely); on the other hand, SSDs work very well in high-altitude environments, while HDDs do not; HDDs should not be shaken excessively.

    If I needed space and I didn't want to carry a bunch of external drives around, I would get the HDD without a question.

    Wait for and buy the upcoming 320GB Intel X25-M
     
  17. fehhkk macrumors 6502a

    fehhkk

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2009
    Location:
    Chicago, IL
    #17
    It depends on your needs. If you need lots of storage space, best bang for the buck will come with the fastest, largest mobile hard drive you can get.

    I was wanting to waste $400 something for a 160GB Intel SSD, but then after I really think about it, I don't think it will be worth it for that price. After I stepped up from a 5400 to a 7200 drive, I can feel the difference, which is good enough for the $129 I spent on the drive.

    For $400, I'm not really sure.
     
  18. raymondu999 thread starter macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2008
    #18
    Hmmm... based upon all your posts here, I think I'll go the way of a 7200 drive, 500GB when I upgrade next. Or maybe whatever drive size is the norm then. I'll go SSD when they truly make the break and begin to go mainstream
     
  19. airplaneman macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2009
    Location:
    USA
    #19
    +1 :D. Best post so far.
     
  20. Hellhammer Moderator

    Hellhammer

    Staff Member

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2008
    Location:
    Finland
    #20
    Intel is releasing new SSDs in a week. 160GB is 400€ and its read is 250MB/s and write is 70MB/s. Also 80GB for 220€. OCW's Agility series is very good too. 30GB is 120€ and has 180MB read and 120MB write. Bigger and faster ones are also available in that series with OK price tag. 32GB or 64GB is enough for OS(s) and apps. Then get a external HD for your files
     
  21. nightfly13 macrumors 6502a

    nightfly13

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2008
    Location:
    Ranchi, India
    #21
    Let me just toss out another idea. I now have my new MBP running 2x hard drives - the stock 320gb it shipped with and a small, cheap SSD (30GB Vertex) in the optical drive bay (hence I survive very happily without a DVD Drive).

    Kinda best of both worlds, and relatively cheap, as long as you don't need the DVD. There's a cheaper version of Optibay for like $40. I paid $70 for one variant.
     
  22. occamsrazor macrumors 6502

    occamsrazor

    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2007
    #22
    Are you able to sleep the HDD when you don't need it? How do you find the effect on battery life of having the additional SSD?
     
  23. maflynn Moderator

    maflynn

    Staff Member

    Joined:
    May 3, 2009
    Location:
    Boston
    #23
    If you're talking more bang for your buck, the a large preferably a 720RPM HD is the only logical choice. You get speed (not quite up to the speed of the SSD) and high capacity. If you just are looking at performance numbers then the SSD will be quicker but a higher $$ per gigabyte cost, it will be much more expensive and thus not getting more bang for your buck.
     
  24. wpc33 macrumors 6502

    wpc33

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2006
    Location:
    Vancouver, BC
    #24
    That is what I would do, also, except I'd DIY the optibay, like MacModMachine did, here: http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=680228
     
  25. patrixl macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jun 19, 2009
    #25
    Get an HDD, and do something else with the money you'll still have left. (crude joke about "bang for the buck" self-censored :p ) Nah seriously, HDD will be fine, and you'll still have plenty of money for other nice things in this life.

    :apple::apple: these are JUST computers after all... :apple::apple:


    Patrix.
     

Share This Page