# SSD upgrade for Macbook Pro



## Andrew Pratt (Feb 16, 2007)

I'm looking at upgrading the hard drive in my 2.16Ghz MBP and am debating the merits of a patriot 128Gig SSD vs a Seagate Momentus 7200.4 500 Gig which is the fastest magnetic laptop drive. The SSD wins on almost all accounts but is much smaller and 2X the price. I'm not too concerned about the price difference if the performance boost is significant enough and I've still got 60+ gig free on my current 128 gig drive so space isn't a factor 9my media's all on the iMac). 

Anyone else made the leap to one of the newer SSD's?


----------



## CanadaRAM (Jul 24, 2005)

Outperforms on "almost" all accounts is like saying a submarine is 99% waterproof.

The Achilles heel of most SSDs is their write performance. This is perhaps the most critical thing that a drive does, and poor write performance is not made up for by faster read performance

The Patriot Warp drive is biased toward read performance - it is slower at writing than the Intel M series (and Kingston's rebranded Intel M)

In these tests:
bit-tech.net | Review - G.Skill, Intel & Patriot SSD group test
the Patriot took about *twice* as long to WRITE a file as a Seagate 250 GB 7200 RPM drive and a Seagate 1 TB drive.

"the most clear is that Intel has produced a phenomenally fast hard disk in the X25-M. The inhouse Intel disk controller is obviously doing its job exceedingly well, delivering write speeds comparable with the fastest high density drives while also able to chuck out frankly ludicrous read speeds capable of booting Vista in less than 34 seconds and Crysis in less than 30.
...
Sadly the same cannot be said for the G.Skill 128GB SSD and Patriot Warp v2, whose J-Micron disk controller sadly led to significant drive stuttering during the MP3 copy test, resulting is a copy time twice as long as the fastest mechanical drives. Standard write speeds were also very disappointing, with results close to double that of the 1TB mechanical hard disk in both write tests."


----------



## Andrew Pratt (Feb 16, 2007)

Interesting review...though I'm not sure its totally fair comparing the 2.5" SSD's to 1TB 3.5" drives as these can't be used in laptops. Still its food for thought. Most of my media creation etc is done on the iMac with this machine just used mainly for web / email / light video conversion etc.


----------



## zlinger (Aug 28, 2007)

I'm not a memory or hard drive expert, so will not go all out technical on write/read tests... one can put an argument to anything really But I have used SSD & HDD on a MacBook Air for home/business use. Now using a MacBook with HDD.

I'd go back to SSD in a second, and even if it "stutters" during MP3 copies, etc. (which I never noticed as an end user). I miss the super fast startup times, snappy OS performance, instant app launching, silent operation. This is where you can save lots of time in the long run. When the price drops for a 256GB drive, I'll probably get one.


----------



## lewdvig (Nov 20, 2003)

Andrew Pratt said:


> Interesting review...though I'm not sure its totally fair comparing the 2.5" SSD's to 1TB 3.5" drives as these can't be used in laptops. Still its food for thought. Most of my media creation etc is done on the iMac with this machine just used mainly for web / email / light video conversion etc.


See if there is a comparison of laptop drives vs desktop drives.

My guess is that the fast desktop drives are twice as fast as common 5400rpm notebook drives. But you should definitely confirm this on your own.

So the Patriot would be about the same write speed as a the drives most of us use in our notebooks.


----------



## Andrew Pratt (Feb 16, 2007)

The price of the intel X25's has now dropped a bit so I may get one of them (80 gig) and sacrifice some capacity for the best of the best with regard to SSD's. The Intel's have respectable write speed even compared to magnetic drives and outstanding read speed...but aren't cheap! Still newegg's price isn't too bad and is tempting me.


----------



## wytwolf (Oct 5, 2006)

Here is a post using xbench to benchmark the new drive. If you scroll down to the bottom of the xbench links within the 1st post in the thread you will see the difference. The original poster went from the standard 54k laptop HD to a SSD. From what I read the only negative to SSD's is the high price for small drives.


MacBook Pro - MBP SSD and 6Gb ram results - Mac-Forums.com


----------



## Andrew Pratt (Feb 16, 2007)

Doing some more reading and I've come across these new drives. There's the OCZ Apex line or G-Skill Titan model that get around some of the write speed issues by RAIDing two smaller arrays. This seems to work pretty well and gives performance close to or better then the Intel drives. The advantage is that they're available in larger capacities for less money.

Example

Newegg.ca - OCZ Apex Series OCZSSD2-1APX120G 2.5" 120GB SATA II Internal Solid state disk (SSD) - Solid State Disks

or 

Newegg.ca - G.SKILL TITAN Series FM-25S2S-128GBT1 2.5" 128GB SATA II Internal Solid state disk (SSD) - Solid State Disks

OCZ also has a new model in the Vertex line that uses a brand new controller and gets even better performance then the Apex models...price is similar as well.

Newegg.ca - OCZ Vertex Series OCZSSD2-1VTX120G 2.5" 120GB SATA II Internal Solid state disk (SSD) - Solid State Disks


I'm pretty sure I'll be getting one of these three drives...just trying to figure out which one.


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

I would be very careful trying to use traditional benchmarks to evaluate SSDs.

From the article below and we concur...



> The traditional hard drive benchmarks showed that these SSDs were incredible. The real world usage and real world tests disagreed.


They have their uses especially on a demanding read presentation where smooth delivery is critical.

Here be dragons otherwise and it matches pretty well with our experience ( limited as to model variety - we too are waiting ).

No SDD I've seen compares to a Velociraptor in day to day response.

Maybe the new ones will but then again you can't stuff a VR in a MacBook either.

Read all about it.....good exhaustive article.

AnandTech: The SSD Anthology: Understanding SSDs and New Drives from OCZ

Here are some of the traps waiting for the unwary



> .............................Sequential Read Performance
> JMicron JMF602B MLC .........................134.7 MB/s
> Western Digital VelociRaptor 300GB ......118 MB/s
> 
> ...


This is what we also found even against other 3.5s the VR did not look all that impressive sustained but responsive .........yow. What a dog on real world random was the SSD......

A server drive we are testing the 1 TB Saturn is the best we've seen against the VR similar response.

So be careful before your jump into SSDs....you will however like the boot time.


----------



## Andrew Pratt (Feb 16, 2007)

That's a good read MacDoc. With the recent price drops on the Intel, it and Vertex are now priced pretty close. It seems the Intel is still the fastest but the Vertex offers similar performance and is a good bit larger. They seem to have focused a lot of attention on the latency in the Vertex line after AanadTech complained about it and he's now happy with them as boot / app drives.



> While I wouldn’t recommend any of the JMicron based drives, with the Vertex I do believe we have a true value alternative to the X25-M. The Intel drive is still the best, but it comes at a high cost. The Vertex can give you a similar experience, definitely one superior to even the fastest hard drives, but at a lower price.





> Drives will get better and although we're still looking at SSDs in their infancy, as a boot/application drive I still believe it's the single best upgrade you can do to your machine today. I've moved all of my testbeds to SSDs as well as my personal desktop. At least now we have two options to choose from: the X25-M and the Vertex.


----------



## chas_m (Dec 2, 2007)

I'm not an expert, but my gut feeling (augmented with reading such as the posts above) is that the "right" technology for flash drives is bubbling in a lab somewhere right now, but will make today's SSDs look like a comparison between the first car tires and today's car tires.

My hunch -- and that's all that it is -- is that SSD technology is not yet really mature, and the time to really jump in is when the next-gen technology comes around (and the consequent price drop).


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

Mine too but I have early adopters in the client pool. So I get to play.

One is considering a RAID SSD in a MacPro... 
Time is money in this circumstance.


----------



## Vexel (Jan 30, 2005)

How much benefit would it be to have an SSD internal and a 7200 firewire external? I'm considering replacing the internal drive in the Mini for something larger.


----------



## chas_m (Dec 2, 2007)

As stated by others, SSD drives have some nice advantages: instant start up, quiet, very fast reads (so things load very quickly), no moving parts (data is not as easily ruined if you drop the computer).

They also have distinct DISadvantages: pricey, no sound to warn you if they are failing, slow writes (Mac OS X is generally kind of write-heavy), and they do wear out over time.

At present, I'd say replace the Mini's internal with a Samsung 2.5" traditional drive (cheap, large, quiet, reliable IMO) and wait for the next-gen before considering SSD -- but if you can afford to play with the new technology, be my guest.


----------



## Andrew Pratt (Feb 16, 2007)

> They also have distinct DISadvantages: pricey, no sound to warn you if they are failing, slow writes (Mac OS X is generally kind of write-heavy), and they do wear out over time.


Slow writes aren't as big an issue with the latest Vertex models...at least when compared to other 2.5" drives. You're likely right in that SSD technology is going to rapidly develop and the drives we see today won't hold a candle to tomorrow models but the same could be said of a lot of things and since I have a need to replace my laptop drive I'm leaning towards getting the fastest drive available to extend the life of this 3 year old laptop


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

Get a standard drive and iDefrag then


----------



## screature (May 14, 2007)

Sounds like SSDs could be of benefit to someone like me who keeps their OS (system drive(s) completely separate from the data drives. The only time I write to my system drives are when I am installing new software or doing OS updates and the like. While they are still too pricey for me personally, as they mature and the prices fall, it does sound like a route I will be going down.


----------



## billwong (Jan 6, 2002)

I put an SSD in my Mac Mini (OCZ 120 Gb Core Series V2 SATA II) and it works great. The computer starts up fast, launches apps quicker that before, and is super quiet. Works great for our kitchen computer which is used mainly for web surfing, email, and iTunes. Sure beats the 5400 rpm drive it came with. Everyone comments how fast this "little computer" is (2 GHz C2D with 4 Gb RAM installed).


----------



## chas_m (Dec 2, 2007)

screature said:


> Sounds like SSDs could be of benefit to someone like me who keeps their OS (system drive(s) completely separate from the data drives. The only time I write to my system drives are when I am installing new software or doing OS updates and the like.


That may be the only time YOU write to the system drive, but if you've ever looked at a log file, you know Mac OS X spends a HUGE amount of time writing little notes to itself ...


----------



## screature (May 14, 2007)

chas_m said:


> That may be the only time YOU write to the system drive, but if you've ever looked at a log file, you know Mac OS X spends a HUGE amount of time writing little notes to itself ...


Yes and if you read the article linked to by MacDoc you will see that for writing random 4KB Blocks SSDs (Intel at least) are extremely fast. As the author points out, these are the type of files that you are writing most of the time while using your system. 









So as I said as an OS/system drive that is dedicated to running your OS and apps an SSD is definitely worth considering if speed is what you seek regardless of price. Price still matters to me so I won't be switching my OS drive to an SSD any time soon, but when the prices fall, as a dedicated OS drive the performance of an SSD drive is clearly there, one could say unbeatable.


----------



## chas_m (Dec 2, 2007)

screature said:


> Yes and if you read the article linked to by MacDoc you will see that for writing random 4KB Blocks SSDs (Intel at least) are extremely fast.


Yes, I did read that. Sorry if I didn't make myself clear, but although small random writes (aka system activity) are not an issue with SSDs, the fact that the cells *wear out* after x number of writes *is*. That's what I was referring to as a possible concern, not the speed.


----------



## screature (May 14, 2007)

Fair enough, but HDDs fail randomly as well, so I don't think that the wearing out of cells is really that much of issue (any form of drive has an operational life span). What is an issue of course is the cost of an HDD relative to a SDD over its operational lifetime. 

Clearly at their current price point, even as an OS/system drive you are paying a very high premium for the performance of an SDD. That is why I won't be considering making the shift to an SSD any time soon, but if and when SDD prices fall to a reasonable price differential compared to HDDs, a SSD as a OS/system drive will be a very attractive alternative. As the autor of the article concludes, _"Drives will get better and although we're still looking at SSDs in their infancy, as a boot/application drive I still believe it's the single best upgrade you can do to your machine today."_


----------



## Andrew Pratt (Feb 16, 2007)

> "Drives will get better and although we're still looking at SSDs in their infancy, as a boot/application drive I still believe it's the single best upgrade you can do to your machine today."


That's the quote that put me over the edge. I've maxed out ram already so getting an SSD should help give new life to this macbook pro and extend its life a little longer...in those terms its not a bad investment.


----------



## Andrew Pratt (Feb 16, 2007)

My OCZ Vertex drive arrived today so I gutted my MBP and installed the drive and a new left fan that was starting to make noise. So far I'm impressed...different being so quiet.

Here's the XBench score

System Info 
Xbench Version 1.3
System Version 10.5.6 (9G55)
Physical RAM 4096 MB
Model MacBookPro2,2
Drive Type OCZ-VERTEX 1370
Disk Test	167.60	
Sequential	133.29	
Uncached Write	201.77	123.88 MB/sec [4K blocks]
Uncached Write	178.53	101.01 MB/sec [256K blocks]
Uncached Read	70.25	20.56 MB/sec [4K blocks]
Uncached Read	191.68	96.34 MB/sec [256K blocks]
Random	225.68	
Uncached Write	87.05	9.22 MB/sec [4K blocks]
Uncached Write	259.77	83.16 MB/sec [256K blocks]
Uncached Read	2055.07	14.56 MB/sec [4K blocks]
Uncached Read	526.24	97.65 MB/sec [256K blocks]


----------



## Trevor W (Apr 6, 2009)

Andrew Pratt said:


> My OCZ Vertex drive arrived today so I gutted my MBP and installed the drive and a new left fan that was starting to make noise. So far I'm impressed...different being so quiet.
> 
> Here's the XBench score
> 
> ...


That's a bit slower than my UMBP w/ the Vertex:

System Info 
Xbench Version 1.3
System Version 10.5.6 (9G2133)
Physical RAM 4096 MB
Model MacBookPro5,1
Drive Type OCZ VERTEX 00.PT1
Disk Test	218.00	
Sequential	182.02	
Uncached Write	213.88	131.32 MB/sec [4K blocks]
Uncached Write	236.53	133.83 MB/sec [256K blocks]
Uncached Read	95.11	27.83 MB/sec [4K blocks]
Uncached Read	390.89	196.46 MB/sec [256K blocks]
Random	271.70	
Uncached Write	95.13	10.07 MB/sec [4K blocks]
Uncached Write	439.38	140.66 MB/sec [256K blocks]
Uncached Read	1506.79	10.68 MB/sec [4K blocks]
Uncached Read	786.92	146.02 MB/sec [256K blocks]


----------



## boukman2 (Apr 6, 2009)

*speed degradation over time*

has anyone measured the speed degradation over time, as written about the previously mentioned article, on this page:
AnandTech: The SSD Anthology: Understanding SSDs and New Drives from OCZ


----------



## Andrew Pratt (Feb 16, 2007)

Trevor your unibody has a SATA II connector...I'm stuck with SATA I so that may be the difference.


----------



## normcorriveau (Dec 6, 2005)

I just got an Intel X-25 (snappy!) yesterday too. Here are my results:

System Info 
Xbench Version 1.3
System Version 10.5.6 (9G55)
Physical RAM 4096 MB
Model MacBookPro5,1
Drive Type INTEL SSDSA2MH160G1GC
Disk Test	224.20	
Sequential	142.51	
Uncached Write	135.91	83.45 MB/sec [4K blocks]
Uncached Write	112.56	63.68 MB/sec [256K blocks]
Uncached Read	106.42	31.14 MB/sec [4K blocks]
Uncached Read	411.58	206.86 MB/sec [256K blocks]
Random	525.33	
Uncached Write	630.01	66.69 MB/sec [4K blocks]
Uncached Write	236.72	75.78 MB/sec [256K blocks]
Uncached Read	1347.74	9.55 MB/sec [4K blocks]
Uncached Read	942.91	174.96 MB/sec [256K blocks]

Norm


----------



## Andrew Pratt (Feb 16, 2007)

Nice! I wanted the X25 as well but the price jumped when I ordered so had to get the Vertex instead. That and i fully expect to see this technology rapidly change over the next few months/years so didn't want to commit to buying too much dive. Truth is on my MBP I only have 40 gigs of data as the iMac is the workhorse so its not like I have big capacity needs.


----------



## screature (May 14, 2007)

Andrew Pratt said:


> My OCZ Vertex drive arrived today...


Just out of curiosity, how is your bootup time? Do you notice programs opening faster, saves quicker, etc? You know real world stuff as opposed to numbers.


----------



## Andrew Pratt (Feb 16, 2007)

Truth be told I haven't spent enough time with it to really comment as this week has been crazy busy...but boot time is now 40 seconds from chime to fully usable which seems a good bit faster. Apps launch faster but aren't instant at least not on the initial launch...if you close it and reopen its instant. Over all it seems more responsive but again I need to spend more time doing day to day things to get a better feel for it.


----------



## normcorriveau (Dec 6, 2005)

I have to agree with Andrew. I haven't timed the boot time but application startup is definately improved. Mail just pops open. Firefox was fast before but it's almost instant now.

Saves are not any faster. The advantage of SSD is really in the read speed. The write speed is pretty much on par with a fast hard drive.

Norm


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

Write is slower - client was testing for capture from a tethered camera and the read speed was less on the SSD than the 320 7200


----------



## Andrew Pratt (Feb 16, 2007)

MacDoc...which SSD? Not all are created equal when it comes to write speeds. The Samsung SSD's that Apple uses aren't that fast compared to the Vertex and Intel drives.


----------



## kloan (Feb 22, 2002)

I wonder what would be a good SSD upgrade for my Macbook Air.... few to choose from in the 1.8" SATA category.


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

Ocz


----------



## kloan (Feb 22, 2002)

MacDoc said:


> Ocz


Which model?


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

128


----------



## Andrew Pratt (Feb 16, 2007)

Not the size...Core, Apex, Vertex, or ?


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

OCZ-128 










google is your friend.

OCZ Technology | Products | Flash Media


----------



## kloan (Feb 22, 2002)

MacDoc said:


> OCZ-128
> 
> 
> 
> ...


The page you linked to doesn't list 1.8" drives, and the picture you posted shows a 2.5" drive.


----------



## normcorriveau (Dec 6, 2005)

Kloan, I don't believe Macdoc was answering your question about a good MacBook Air replacement but rather which SSD he tested and found slower write speeds.

You mentioned SATA for your Air so I assume you have a second generation Air? If so, have you looked at the Intel X-18? Pricey, yes but if price is not a big concern I think they are worth a look.

Macdoc, if you really tested a OCZ Core 128 (NOT Core2) then I think you may see different results with a newer drive. This is a fast moving technology. They are getting better and cheaper every day with these things. I think it's only two or three years before all laptops (except for really cheap ones) will ship with SSDs.

Norm


----------



## Andrew Pratt (Feb 16, 2007)

MacDoc if you really did try a OCZ Core drive then that explains your finding's...the Core and Apex models are not comparable to the Vertex or Intel's.


----------



## kevleviathan (Apr 9, 2008)

Andrew Pratt said:


> Truth be told I haven't spent enough time with it to really comment as this week has been crazy busy...but boot time is now 40 seconds from chime to fully usable which seems a good bit faster. Apps launch faster but aren't instant at least not on the initial launch...if you close it and reopen its instant. Over all it seems more responsive but again I need to spend more time doing day to day things to get a better feel for it.


That doesn't sound right because my MBP boots in 30 seconds from chime with a 5400rpm hd, lol.


----------



## Andrew Pratt (Feb 16, 2007)

Mine chimes, then goes white for 30 seconds....and then the apple logo appears and then 15 seconds later the desktop's there.


----------



## kevleviathan (Apr 9, 2008)

It should NOT go white for 30 seconds. The apple logo should appear in about 10 seconds or less. Something sounds funky with your RAM or your boot settings. Try toggling the default boot drive in system preferences (startup disk).


----------



## Andrew Pratt (Feb 16, 2007)

Thanks! I did that and now it boots in 14 seconds...thats from full off to the desktop being displayed...


----------



## kevleviathan (Apr 9, 2008)

NICE! Mad SSD envy.


----------



## kloan (Feb 22, 2002)

ncorriveau said:


> Kloan, I don't believe Macdoc was answering your question about a good MacBook Air replacement but rather which SSD he tested and found slower write speeds.
> 
> You mentioned SATA for your Air so I assume you have a second generation Air? If so, have you looked at the Intel X-18? Pricey, yes but if price is not a big concern I think they are worth a look.
> 
> ...


Oh I see now, my post kinda got stuck in the middle of it...

Yeah, I've been eyeing the X18... it seems like the best drive for the MBA at this point (yes, 2nd gen). I was hoping to get at least 128GB though. Any idea what the MBA 128GB drive is? I can't recall... haven't seen it on eBay yet. 80GB seems to be the largest, aside from the bare 120GB Sammy's that show up...


----------



## Andrew Pratt (Feb 16, 2007)

Apple still uses Samsumg SSD's I believe. They're reliable but hardly speed demons compared to Intel's or the Vertex line.


----------

