Which SSD? OCZ Vertex/OCZ Agility/Kingston HyperX

Discussion in 'MacBook Pro' started by EKCI, Sep 26, 2011.

  1. EKCI macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Sep 11, 2011
    #1
    Hi :) I'm new here.

    I think that my MBP needs some boost.
    I've got 2009 middle Macbook Pro 13" (C2D 2,26, GF 9400M).

    What should I know about SSD in Macs?
    Can you suggest me any disc?

    I've found:
    OCZ Vertex 3
    Ocz Agility 3
    Kingston HyperX
     
  2. Quinoky macrumors regular

    Quinoky

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2011
    Location:
    Groningen, Netherlands
    #2
    Do you value reliability much, or does only performance concern you?
     
  3. dsciel macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2011
    #3
    Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_3 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8J2 Safari/6533.18.5)

    if u keeping ur macbook for a while, save your money on SATA 3 because i think 2009 model only support sata 2
     
  4. peetyrd macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2011
    #4
    In lieu of starting a new thread, I have the same question.

    I have a Macbook Pro 5,1 (early 2009) C2D 2.66ghz. Just recently put 8gb of ram in to it. I wont be looking to get a new laptop until 2013 so I figure I'll make the investment to put an SSD in to speed up the machine. I'm not neccessarily looking for an ultra high end SSD, just looking for one that going to be the best bang for the buck.

    This one can be had for $118 on newegg.
    OCZ Vertex Plus OCZSSD2-1VTXPL120G 2.5" 120GB SATA II MLC Internal Solid State Drive (SSD)

    Seems like a heck of a deal, but some reviewers, mainly windowss users, have experienced corruption issues.


    What do you guys think. Thanks!

    And to the OP...you'd be wasting your money looking at SATA 3 as your macbook pro doesnt support it.
     
  5. GermanyChris macrumors 601

    GermanyChris

    Joined:
    Jul 3, 2011
    Location:
    Here
    #5

    If this helps, I'm on a new Vertex 2 freshly RMA'd from OCZ...The new one (slow one) seems to be more stable than the old one (fast one)..OCZ has had there fair share of issues but they seem to be decent folks to work with..
     
  6. EKCI thread starter macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Sep 11, 2011
    #6
    I don't understand - these SSD won't work in my MBP?

    I want to buy disc to use it for few years with my present Mac and keep it for next one :)
     
  7. dsciel macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2011
    #7
    Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_3 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8J2 Safari/6533.18.5)

    the vertex 3 and other sata 3 SSD will work but will not perform maximum speed that the SSD have . so i would say to buy vertex 2 or other sata 2 drives...but personally do not recommend the SSD and the brands you mentioned because of power consumption and stability
     
  8. EKCI thread starter macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Sep 11, 2011
    #8
    So what you recommend me? :)
     
  9. DockMac macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2008
    #9
    iyho, which drives have the better power consumption and stability?

    i am looking into the samsung, crucial, and intel drives. iirc, intel and crucial may even use the same chips? i have read that ocz, although super fast, do come with a host of problems.
     
  10. WardC macrumors 68030

    WardC

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2007
    Location:
    Fort Worth, TX
    #11
    The best drive to get is an OWC (if you have a 2010 or earlier model, get the 3G drive, the 6G (SATA III) only has the speed benefits on 2011 models...

    The Apple/Toshiba drives are not bad either, and they will work with TRIM support under Lion, but they don't use a Sandforce controller. They are still good and reliable drives though.

    Whatever you do, DO NOT get an OCZ drive, Vertex, Agility, or otherwise...they are the cheapest drives around, and I have heard nothing but problems with these drives...
     
  11. Meever macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2009
    #12
    OCZ for speed. They're friggen fast. Agility is an absolute beast in it's price range. And Vertex 3 Max ranks #1 in most speed benchmarks. But they do have a pretty mediocre track record.

    Intel and Samsung has the most reliable drives. Samsung tends to be faster and cheaper than Intel though.

    Next you have to consider Sata 3 or 2. If you plan on keeping your hard drive a while and upgrading to a new computer soon just get a sata 3. Otherwise get a 2.
     
  12. MikhailT macrumors 601

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2007
    #13
    Intel, Samsung and Crucial seem to be the top three brands that focus mostly on reliability first with performance second. Crucial m4 is the underrated one out of the bunch, great bang for the bucks IMO.
     
  13. DockMac macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2008
  14. tinkori macrumors member

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2011
    #15
    Here are the SSD upgrades I have helped with:
    * MBP c2d - Kingston v+100 96GB - toshiba controller used in MBA. Doesnt need TRIM
    * macbook unibody - same v+100 drive
    * MBP i5 - Intel x25-m with Lion and trim patch

    We chose controller reliability over speed. The above drives are plenty fast and helps shift the bottleneck back to the cpu. For a 2011 MBP I was considering a samsung too. But I had the 120GB x25-m so I chose not to invest in a sata3 ssd for now.

    For an older mac, I would recommend the v+100 drives due to their garbage collection (hence no need for TRIM) and no firmware issues. Also these are much cheaper (often ~$1/GB with rebates) .... for max reliability I would recommend Intel
     
  15. kasakka macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2008
    #16
    Ocz has some serious issues with their drives. They seem to blame it on motherboard manufacturers but it's a bunch of bollocks because older Intel X25-Ms for example work flawlessly. See ocz messageboard for lots of trouble. For that reason alone I'd avoid them.

    Before somebody chimes in that their new Ocz drive works flawlessly, so does my Agility 3. However it would not work right in my desktop PC whereas my old Intel worked right in both my Mac and PC.

    The speed difference between my ocz and intel drives is not even noticeable in real use.
     
  16. EKCI thread starter macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Sep 11, 2011
    #17
    I§ can buy Agility 3 for 500$. It is not better to buy Sata 3 disc even if i have 2009 model? It will work for years...
     
  17. Quinoky macrumors regular

    Quinoky

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2011
    Location:
    Groningen, Netherlands
    #18
    Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_5 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8L1 Safari/6533.18.5)

    I'm surprised nobody recommended the Kingston HyperX for performance yet. From most of the benchmarks I've seen, it seems to be even faster than the Vertex 3. Or does the HyperX have issues on OS X?
     
  18. AndreyATC macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2011
    #19
    My vote goes to Crucial M4 (firmware 0009)
    After reading lots of reviews and benchmark tests, it looks like it's the only reliable choice with speeds close to the max of what modern SSDs offer these days
    It is also far from most expencieve ones

    BTW, it beats Vertex 3 in certain tests, while being very close in others

    P.S. Nothing wrong with going SATA III, it's still faster a bit on even SATA II platform. And you can always put it into newer machine
     
  19. basesloaded190 macrumors 68030

    basesloaded190

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2007
    Location:
    Wisconsin
    #20
    If your 2009 macbook pro doesn't have a sata III connection, you will never get the true speeds of a sata III drive, it will just run at the max sata II speed of your computer. No sense in spending more for a III when you can't take advantage of it.
     
  20. Weaselboy Moderator

    Weaselboy

    Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2005
    Location:
    California
    #21
    You do realize that OWC and OCZ both use the same Sandforce controller and the exact same firmware, making them indistinguishable. There is no reason to pay more for the same drive from OWC.
     
  21. EKCI thread starter macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Sep 11, 2011
    #22
    You are right.. But distributors said that SSD will work for 2'000'000 hours. Is there no sense to buy one good disc, which has the futer, to use it with futer Macbooks?
     
  22. Weaselboy Moderator

    Weaselboy

    Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2005
    Location:
    California
    #23
    There is an argument to be made for buying the SATA III SSD if you plan to upgrade to a new MBP soon. But if you do not plan to do it REAL soon, don't bother, by then newer, cheaper, and faster SSDs will be out anyway.
     
  23. MikhailT macrumors 601

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2007
    #24
    Are you absolutely sure about that? OCZ is known to optimize the reference firmware from Sandforce, it's why they're a bit faster and slower in many areas than any other SSDs, including ones that have the same NANDs.
     
  24. shortcut3d macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2011
    #25
    There are differences in the firmware for all the Sandforce 2200 series controller by brand. OWC focuses on speed and stability with Macs. OCZ is more focused on speed, typically Windows. OCZ even offers MAX IOPs editions which focuses on IOPs which would have more real world benefit. These MAX IOPs editions also get different memory, 35nm vs 25nm. These build difference affect performance and price.
     

Share This Page