Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Which SSD is the best?
- Thread starter techstaholic
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
it's in the reviews. simple. intel is more expensive for a reason. failure rate is way lower than ocz or owc. i want the 520 series and i plan on upgrading to a sata III and replacing my apple ssd with it because I love my 320 sata II so much that i have in my optical bay.
Lol I am sure its possible to get this result from any working model from any brand but the point of the story is which choice has the best known probability for a sustained positive outcome? Which is the best choice? Which is the best overall deal?
You can only get one so the idea is trying to make the smartest choice and buying the best quality product for the price range. Everything else being the same, the choice with the least amount of known problems is probably the best choice to minimize any potential issues.
If you are going by customer reviews, the Crucial M4 seems to be the best rated, with Intel 510 (and 320) right next to it. I'm looking for a 256 GB SSD and everything else has too many horror stories (ranging from DOA to failing after a short period of usage) for me to even remotely consider, where as the M4 seems to perform flawlessly (as does the 510/320). While I want fast, I want reliability over speed as all SSDs are fast, but not all SSDs seem exceptionally reliable. I really don't take professional reviews into much account as they look more at performance rather than long term reliability. They have constantly overlooked Intel because they favor performance and they fail to note that in terms of long-term owner surveys, Intel has led the pack for quite a while now in customer satisfaction. I also shopped how the same models in other sizes compared. Where as some 256 GB models were rated well, the 64/128/etc were rated terribly. Again the M4 was the most consistent, with the Intel being right next to it. So I am doing the M4 or the Intel 510.
I've said this before...read up on customer reviews on the SSDs you are considering. You get the owner's perspective, and not someone who is a brand-junkie or a manufacturer with a sales pitch. You will be amazed how much the quality and reported reliability differs. When 1 in 3 users are reporting a drive failure, something is obviously wrong.
I've said this before...read up on customer reviews on the SSDs you are considering. You get the owner's perspective, and not someone who is a brand-junkie or a manufacturer with a sales pitch. You will be amazed how much the quality and reported reliability differs. When 1 in 3 users are reporting a drive failure, something is obviously wrong.
I'm planning to get the new iteration of the 17" MBP when it comes out (hopefully sooner rather than later). But I think I'm going to get an SSD now and try it out in my current (early-'09) MBP, then move it to my new computer when I get it. Might as well enjoy my current setup as much as possible before the new one!
Based on all the research and price, I'm leaning towards the Crucial M4. $65 cheaper than the Samsung 830 on Amazon (though I'd have welcomed the Batman game since I don't have it yet, lol). Both drives look excellent.
--As far as I can tell, both should work on my 2.66 Core 2 Duo MBP (early 2009) ... am I correct here?
At any rate, after a trial run if I really do notice a big speed increase, I may transfer it to my wife's computer (which serves as our media center hub) and buy a new one for the new MBP when it comes.
Based on all the research and price, I'm leaning towards the Crucial M4. $65 cheaper than the Samsung 830 on Amazon (though I'd have welcomed the Batman game since I don't have it yet, lol). Both drives look excellent.
--As far as I can tell, both should work on my 2.66 Core 2 Duo MBP (early 2009) ... am I correct here?
At any rate, after a trial run if I really do notice a big speed increase, I may transfer it to my wife's computer (which serves as our media center hub) and buy a new one for the new MBP when it comes.
Last edited:
Yes. Your 2009 is a Sata2 (3.0 GBPS) and the current MBP is a Sata3 (6.0 GBPS). Because of this, you should get a Sata3 drive to fully utilize the 2011+ MBP when you get it. However, if you get a Sata2 drive (on closeout of something), it will still work in the new MBP but it will only run at a negotiated link speed of 3.0 GBPS because that is all Sata2 permits. Most newer models SSDs are Sata3. With all that said, Sata2 is still fast. The current Toshiba SSD that Apple uses is still a Sata2 drive and so while the MBP can handle a Sata3 drive, it still is using a Sata2 one (unless this changed). As far as the gain you will see over a HDD, it will be huge.
The Intel 310 and 510 are two to cross shop the Crucial with. If you are going to put it in your wife's comp, the 310 is more budget friendly. The 510 is a performance drive and it is among the finest of SSDs on the market (and it could easily be the best). With that said the 310 is also a splendid choice. They don't get as much press as the SandForce 2xxx driven ones because they are not quite as fast when benchmarked (in real world usage most users will not tell a difference), but if you look up customer reviews, you will see just how much better than Crucial and Intel drives are than say the Corsair or OCZ.
Oh and since I am often flamed on this forum for saying the reliability of the Intel/Crucial stands above others, let me post the source for my reasoning...
I simply types in "[company name] ssd" into Google and took a pic of the first few results with customer reviews. Reviews on other sites virtually mimic these reviews. These reviews are from owners, which says a lot more than one from magazines which may use the product for 20 minutes.
Attachments
Intel's SSD drives are by far the most reliable. Take a look at the numbers in this anandtech article;
http://www.anandtech.com/show/4202/the-intel-ssd-510-review/3
Intel's failure rates are at 0.59% where the next best drive is from Corsair at a significant difference of 2.17%, and it goes downhill from there for all other SSD manufacturers. Its a 11 month old review, but I don't think much has changed for the other players.
You get what you pay for, and I wouldnt get anything but an Intel drive.
http://www.anandtech.com/show/4202/the-intel-ssd-510-review/3
Intel's failure rates are at 0.59% where the next best drive is from Corsair at a significant difference of 2.17%, and it goes downhill from there for all other SSD manufacturers. Its a 11 month old review, but I don't think much has changed for the other players.
You get what you pay for, and I wouldnt get anything but an Intel drive.
it's not only about buying the "best" SSD, when it comes to Mac, one must also consider reliability and compatibility
i would say the 2 best SSD at the moment considering all these characteristics are:
- intel 510
- samsung 830
with the advantage for samsung thanks to its price
these have 0 issue at all when installing them inside a mac
i would say the 2 best SSD at the moment considering all these characteristics are:
- intel 510
- samsung 830
with the advantage for samsung thanks to its price
these have 0 issue at all when installing them inside a mac
That pretty much sums up user's buying habits - nothing wrong with that. But for me... service after the sale is most important. I couldn't care less about failure stats. They're all made using the same supplier parts anyway.
And in our case... it's all about which SSD plays nice with MBP's anyway.
My 500GB Crucial is keeps purring away with no Trim Support and no speed degradation. (And at $650 now it's a bargain). Crucial has frequent and aggressive firmware updates which is 90% of the battle for macs.
You're an Intel fan. I like Crucial. We both win.
Aren't the Crucial and Intel internals in many ways very similar? They get about the same ratings...I've not heard one bad thing about the M4 and Crucial showed us they can get the job done for us Mac people when they detected an issue and updated the firmware accordingly in a very quick manner.
Just to update, I got my new Crucial M4 up and running yesterday on my 2009 17" MBP. Between this and upgrading from 4GB to 8GB of ram, I think I'll be able to hold out until June for the new MBP (still hope it's not that long).
This drive is FAST. I haven't run any benchmark programs because I don't care that much about such things, maybe at some point. I knew boot times would be speedy, and they are. But copying files from a Firewire 800 drive is just crazy fast, feels like twice as fast. I'm interested to see if I notice an improvement for Star Wars: TOR.
So far I'm pleased! Thanks for the recommendations, gang! At this point I think I'll be getting an SSD for the wife's computer as well.
This drive is FAST. I haven't run any benchmark programs because I don't care that much about such things, maybe at some point. I knew boot times would be speedy, and they are. But copying files from a Firewire 800 drive is just crazy fast, feels like twice as fast. I'm interested to see if I notice an improvement for Star Wars: TOR.
So far I'm pleased! Thanks for the recommendations, gang! At this point I think I'll be getting an SSD for the wife's computer as well.
With the prices dropping and some SSD's using different components now, which is considered the best now?
I cannot decide between the Samsung 256gb ($225) and the OWC 256gm for ($267) for my '11 i7 MBP.
I cannot decide between the Samsung 256gb ($225) and the OWC 256gm for ($267) for my '11 i7 MBP.
Run through to the end of this thread and you will see some recent recommendations. Everybody seems pretty happy with either the Samsung 830 or the Crucial M4.
IMO there is really nothing about OWC that justifies the price premium.