Which SSD - Crucial or OWC?

Discussion in 'Buying Tips and Advice' started by SWD, Mar 21, 2014.

  1. SWD macrumors member

    Joined:
    May 3, 2011
    #1
    Looking to do an upgrade on my 2010 MBP. I really like the price on the Crucial, but why would the OWC one be that much more expensive. As far as I can tell Crucial beats the OWC in most performance tests (from what I could find). Thoughts?

    OWC has theirs for $165


    Crucial has one for $109
     
  2. jdblas69 macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2012
    #2
    Last year I put a Crucial M4 in my mid 2010 MBP. The M4 is the predecessor to the M500 you are looking at. It has operated flawlessly.

    You may also want to look at the Samsung SSD lineup. Samsung and Crucial are two of the more popular SSD drives mentioned around here.
     
  3. TheGenerous macrumors 6502a

    TheGenerous

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2010
    Location:
    I'm an Austronaut
    #3
    I will get the Crucial SSD. My Mac Minis have Samsung SSDs, but I will expect Crucial to be as good as their memory cards. OWC left me down with an enclosure (for the stock external hard drive) that works sometimes and others don't, and that is scary because I'm afraid of the external hard drive dying
     
  4. Dc2006ster, Mar 21, 2014
    Last edited: Mar 21, 2014

    Dc2006ster macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2011
    Location:
    Alberta, Canada
    #4
    I have one of each. I cannot tell the difference and when I buy another it will be the one that is the best deal.

    In my 2006 Mac Pro I have added ram, more hard drives, new video card and swapped the cpus from dual to quad core but adding the SSD was the best upgrade in terms of cost/performance.
     
  5. SWD thread starter macrumors member

    Joined:
    May 3, 2011
    #5
    Thanks. I'm looking at SSD in in general because the prices have dropped, especially the Crucial. I wondered why the OWC was more expensive, I thought their RAM was usually cheaper.

    ----------

    Next step is to figure out if one should enable TRIM support. I hear opposite things, especially with the newer models of SSD doing pretty good garbage collection. We don't do much on the machine so I doubt it will matter too much.
     
  6. DrBubba macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2011
    #6
    My Crucial M500 Is Rockin'!

    I'm running a Crucial M500 960GB SSD (with firmware updated to ver 3) in a refurb (new to me) 2012 MBP and it just rocks! Micron suggests enabling TRIM so I'm running Trim Enabler to make it so. This SSD is plenty fast enough for me, it's been stable thus far, and i boot at start-up in about 20 seconds or so. It's quiet, doesn't generate much heat, sips power and has made my MBP a joy to use. I hardly ever see a beach ball and everything both actually is and "seems" faster. Now, when I use my Mac Mini with a spinning HD I really notice the difference. Why did I go with Crucial? I got essentially a 1TB SSD on "special" for way less than 1/2 what the equivalent OWC drive cost, and there weren't many other 1TB options available at the time. The overall value was with M500, and my previous positive experience with Crucial RAM sealed the deal. Are other SSDs better than the M500? Maybe, but based on my experience you can't go wrong with the Crucial M500. As always, YMMV.
     
  7. SaSaSushi macrumors 68040

    SaSaSushi

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2007
    Location:
    Takamatsu, Japan
    #7
  8. shinji macrumors 65816

    shinji

    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2007
    #8
    I've had no problems with my Samsung, knock on wood. The performance is fantastic.
     
  9. Parkin Pig macrumors 6502a

    Parkin Pig

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2009
    Location:
    Yorkshire-by-Gum
    #9
    +1 for Crucial M4 - I've had one in my 2009 MBP for 2 years now and it's had a whole new lease of life ever since. I've been maxing out the RAM on my Macs with Crucial gear for as long as I remember, and they've never let me down.

    Do a bit of research before enabling TRIM - a lot of SSDs now come with self-management software that eliminates the need, and indeed will cause conflict with TRIM enabling software.
     
  10. SaSaSushi macrumors 68040

    SaSaSushi

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2007
    Location:
    Takamatsu, Japan
    #10
    Thanks, I have done. Apparently, garbage collection or no "Enabling Trim is Almost Always Worth It"
     
  11. Parkin Pig macrumors 6502a

    Parkin Pig

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2009
    Location:
    Yorkshire-by-Gum
    #11
    We can go on forever siting other people's 'definitive' guides. I use a Crucial SSD, and here's an extract from Crucial's website...


    Crucial SSDs and TRIM/Garbage Collection

    Since not all operating systems support TRIM, Crucial SSDs have a special feature called Active Garbage Collection. Active Garbage Collection is a process that helps an SSD maintain optimal performance by freeing up memory sectors that are no longer in use. Garbage collection is part of the SSD itself and thus not dependent on your computer’s operating system. Since garbage collection is part of the SSD’s firmware, it works regardless of which operating and filing systems your computer is using.
     
  12. Giuly, Mar 22, 2014
    Last edited: Nov 23, 2014

    Giuly macrumors 68040

    Giuly

    #12
    SanDisk Ultra Plus.

    Your Macbook's SATA ports only support SATA 3.0GBit/s, so whatever top speeds SSD makers claim, it doesn't matter. At those speeds, the SanDisk Ultra Plus is actually faster than a Samsung 840Pro, but costs as much as the 840EVO. And unlike the EVO doesn't use cheaper TLC NAND chips that shorten the lifetime of the drive.

    Here's some Photoshop magic for you:
    [​IMG]
    [​IMG]

    The black bar would mark the bandwidth limits of a 2010 MBP. Long story short, the 256GB Ultra Plus is as fast as an 840 Pro on SATA-II, and a lot faster than the 240GB M500.
     
  13. jonathanbruce macrumors member

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2012
    Location:
    Hastings, East Sussex, England
    #13
    Where did you get your thunderbolt enclosure from? I am looking for one for my Samsung 750gb ssd EVO drive i got last month. It has been in a usb3.0 caddy but does feel like it could go faster. especially now i have a new retina MBPro 15" and a MacPro
     
  14. SWD thread starter macrumors member

    Joined:
    May 3, 2011
    #14
    I finally pulled the trigger on the Crucial, it'll be here next week. I didn't need a huge performance ssd. I'm sure anything will beat the pants off of the current 30-50 MB/s (I think, it's not in front of me.)

    I should've known better than to open up the TRIM can of worms.


    I'm planning on installing Mavericks via SATA to USB cable before opening up the MBP. That's a good idea, right?


     
  15. SaSaSushi, Mar 22, 2014
    Last edited: Mar 22, 2014

    SaSaSushi macrumors 68040

    SaSaSushi

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2007
    Location:
    Takamatsu, Japan
    #15
    The point made by the article I sent you was that even with the garbage collection on recent flash drives, there is a slight performance increase with TRIM enabled and more importantly, the OS and SSD controller work together, reducing GC's unnecessary writes/erases that shorten the life of the drive.

    I actually have an Inateck UASP USB3 enclosure here that performs slightly better than my Thunderbolt enclosure but I stick with the latter because of the ability to enable TRIM, both in OS X and BootCamp Windows.

    ----------

    I am using the Delock 42490 single drive enclosure. It is currently available at Amazon UK for about 112 GBP (I paid much less here in Japan for it and it also seems to be about 40 GBP cheaper from Amazon US). It is very lightweight aluminum, well constructed and AC powered. I'm really satisfied with it.
     
  16. jimsowden macrumors 68000

    jimsowden

    Joined:
    Sep 6, 2003
    Location:
    NY
    #16
    Have the EVOIII and it's perfect. So long as you remember to turn on Trim Enabler.
     
  17. Parkin Pig macrumors 6502a

    Parkin Pig

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2009
    Location:
    Yorkshire-by-Gum
    #17
    That's the way I did it...

    1 - I used the USB to SATA cable to do a clean OS install on the SSD.
    2 - I installed the SSD in the MBP.
    3 - I connected the original internal hard drive using the USB/SATA cable.
    4 - I used the Migration Assistant utility to transfer Applications, Settings etc from the old disk to the SSD.
     
  18. SWD thread starter macrumors member

    Joined:
    May 3, 2011
    #18
    Thanks. I'm going to do a very manual migration. There's just too much junk on this machine.

    Here are some screenshots of disk speed tests. One is under normal conditions 2 users logged in, apps running vs only 1 user logged in no apps running.

    [​IMG]

    https://app.box.com/s/2obrhzco1cmw75f2cx6p

    [​IMG]

    https://app.box.com/s/o564iyzj6i0c0q1f1t1n
     
  19. SWD thread starter macrumors member

    Joined:
    May 3, 2011
  20. Parasprite macrumors 68000

    Parasprite

    Joined:
    Mar 5, 2013
    #20
    That's... surprising actually. My 2007 MacBook Air booted in ~70 seconds.

    The good news is that even with the PATA limitation of that POS it still benefited significantly from the SSD upgrade.
     
  21. SWD thread starter macrumors member

    Joined:
    May 3, 2011
    #21

    Surprising in a good or bad way?


    Today's the day I open up the MBP to install the Crucial SSD drive. Mavericks was installed via SATA to USB, so it should just plop in and work. Wish me luck.
     
  22. Parasprite macrumors 68000

    Parasprite

    Joined:
    Mar 5, 2013
    #22
    Surprisingly slow. Maybe I just needed less running or something. The good news either way is that it went down to ~45 seconds after the SSD upgrade. I was floored when the same upgrade put my Mac Mini to under 12 seconds.

    Should be pretty straightforward. Good luck and go(o)d speed! :D
     
  23. jbachandouris macrumors 68040

    jbachandouris

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2009
    Location:
    Upstate NY
    #23
    I installed the EVO 250GB on my mid 2010 MBP. I rarely reboot, so I notice almost no speed difference and the battery (brand new battery installed by Apple) life appears to be shorter.

    Is it the drive or the age of my MBP?
     
  24. Weaselboy Moderator

    Weaselboy

    Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2005
    Location:
    California
    #24
    Your MBP uses the older SATA II (3Gbps) drive connection interface, so you will not see the top speeds others with newer machines are mentioning here. But even still, it should be a noticeable difference particularly with random file access type operations.
     
  25. talmy macrumors 601

    talmy

    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2009
    Location:
    Oregon
    #25
    OWC was quickly dismissed in this thread. Well, I bought an OWC SSD last year. Reasons:
    • I wanted a drive that was guaranteed to be compatible
    • Original HDD failed so I was in a hurry to replace and didn't want to spend time researching
    • System had minimal storage needs (media center with media stored on another system) so any additional cost I paid for the convenience of OWC was small.
     

Share This Page