Luminous Landscape Forum
Equipment & Techniques => Computers & Peripherals => Topic started by: JonathanBenoit on October 13, 2010, 09:20:16 pm
-
I'm looking to swap out my stock hard drive in my macbook for an SSD drive.
Any recommendations?
-
http://macperformanceguide.com/index_topics.html#cat_ssd
- Diglloyd recommends OWC Mercury Pro
- I got the impression that SSDs with Sandforce controllers are the best right now.
BR
Erik
I'm looking to swap out my stock hard drive in my macbook for an SSD drive.
Any recommendations?
-
http://macperformanceguide.com/index_topics.html#cat_ssd
- Diglloyd recommends OWC Mercury Pro
- I got the impression that SSDs with Sandforce controllers are the best right now.
BR
Erik
Eric
The sandforce controller does compress the data, I don't know what the speed effect would be on images. Images are usually not that good for compressing lossless.
Images are also "big" files and reading/writing big files is something that HDD's do rather well. It's with random I/O that SSD's really make the very big difference.
-
I'm not sure how I feel about OWC. I was looking for a 80GB SSD, but they only have 60 and 120. I've read good things about the corsair force 80.
-
The main reason you want to go with a sandforce controller is that it natively supports trim ("garbage collection" or re-using previously written blocks), which OSX does not.
http://macperformanceguide.com/SSD-RealWorld-SevereDuty.html
-
The main reason you want to go with a sandforce controller is that it natively supports trim ("garbage collection" or re-using previously written blocks), which OSX does not.
http://macperformanceguide.com/SSD-RealWorld-SevereDuty.html
I'm sure OWC SSD is a great product, but I am a bit weary of Diglloyd's reviews of them since they are a sponsor for his site.
I havent seen any comparisons of their product to the Corsair Force, which also has TRIM.
-
Hi,
Yes I'm aware of that. On the other hand it seems that OWC puts some real effort in finding and validating stuff that actually works. Diglloyd also does a lot of testing, so I guess that he knows what he writes about.
I have bought 16 GByte memory from OWC when that option was brand new and a 4 bay RAID which I for external backup. I have been very satisfied with both. I just ordered a SSD from OWC.
Best regards
Erik
I'm sure OWC SSD is a great product, but I am a bit weary of Diglloyd's reviews of them since they are a sponsor for his site.
I havent seen any comparisons of their product to the Corsair Force, which also has TRIM.
-
I use the OWC RE SSD's in both my laptop and desktop. They are screamers, totally silent, and use a lot less power than a spinner. Had em in for around 8 months now and would buy them again: http://eshop.macsales.com/shop/internal_storage/Mercury_Extreme_SSD_Sandforce/Solid_State_Raid_Edition
-
Another choice which I'm using is the Crucial C300's. They're a mature drive and one of the fastest available and they have TRIM support natively. I have several of their 256g models and I'm very happy with them.
The truth is.. you're not going to be able to 'feel' the difference between the top 10 SSD's or even the top 20 for that matter. You'll be able to measure the difference.. but unless you spend a lot of time learning to understand the tests and how they relate to your files that won't mean much either.
What matters.. is TRIM support, proven reliability, and a mature product with all the bugs worked out. Intel, Crucial, and some Sandforce controlled products qualify.
-
I went with the 120GB OWC Mercury Extreme Pro SSD with 6 GB RAM(maxed out). Unfortunately I cant remove the optical drive and put another SSD in its place. I probably would have bought two 60GB and striped them.
-
SSD's don't really need drive bays. Put a square of double sided mounting tape on the thing and stick it anywhere the cables will reach. They're very light, don't move/vibrate, or get hot.. so this works.
-
The truth is.. you're not going to be able to 'feel' the difference between the top 10 SSD's or even the top 20 for that matter. You'll be able to measure the difference.. but unless you spend a lot of time learning to understand the tests and how they relate to your files that won't mean much either.
So true.
But we're in a forum where hearsay and conjecture often overrule facts. As demonstrate by statements like: "On the other hand it seems that OWC puts some real effort in finding and validating stuff that actually works. Diglloyd also does a lot of testing, so I guess that he knows what he writes about."
-
SSD's don't really need drive bays. Put a square of double sided mounting tape on the thing and stick it anywhere the cables will reach. They're very light, don't move/vibrate, or get hot.. so this works.
I actually recommend doing this if other hardware you use gets seriously hot. Attaching your SSD's on the side of your case will improve airflow and increase the life of your hardware!
-
I have a MBP, 2.66ghz core-2D, 8g, and a 320g now 60% full (100g free). This is the original Fujitzu HD that Diglloyd calls a true "dog" and it is getting slower. I'm planning to replace it with (2) 256g OWG SSD drives. For this computer, running LR, PS5 etc, what would be my best approach? Images are on portable eSATA drives connected via Sonnet express card, backed up to NAS. When I make the switch I will clean up some stuff and probably gain ~50g of space. This notebook is my only computer, and I'd like to get another year or two out of it.
1. (2) 200 OWC RE drives Raid-0 stripped, no dedicated scratch
2. (2) 240 OWC installed individually, with PS and LR on one and everything else on the other. Not sure where to point the scratch...?
Would I notice any difference given my hardware? Option 2 gets me 80g more space and saves $180. Is there a third better option?
Dave
I went with the 120GB OWC Mercury Extreme Pro SSD with 6 GB RAM(maxed out). Unfortunately I cant remove the optical drive and put another SSD in its place. I probably would have bought two 60GB and striped them.
-
I went with the 120GB OWC Mercury Extreme Pro SSD with 6 GB RAM(maxed out). Unfortunately I cant remove the optical drive and put another SSD in its place. I probably would have bought two 60GB and striped them.
Hi how speedy is you're SSD with raw and tiff files? Isn't the compression killing the speed?
-
I have a MBP, 2.66ghz core-2D, 8g, and a 320g now 60% full (100g free). This is the original Fujitzu HD that Diglloyd calls a true "dog" and it is getting slower. I'm planning to replace it with (2) 256g OWG SSD drives. For this computer, running LR, PS5 etc, what would be my best approach? Images are on portable eSATA drives connected via Sonnet express card, backed up to NAS. When I make the switch I will clean up some stuff and probably gain ~50g of space. This notebook is my only computer, and I'd like to get another year or two out of it.
1. (2) 200 OWC RE drives Raid-0 stripped, no dedicated scratch
2. (2) 240 OWC installed individually, with PS and LR on one and everything else on the other. Not sure where to put point the scratch...?
I would I notice any difference given my hardware? Option 2 gets me 80g more space and saves $180. Is there a third better option?
Dave
With 8G ram, you will tag scratch with large files. However you probably won't regularly with medium to smaller files. With CS5, the main slow-down is the initial reservation of scratch. With option 1, this will be virtually instantaneous since that array is so freaking fast. When you actually need scratch I/O, option 1 is still so freaking fast that it probably won't be much of a bother. However, when scratch is being tagged, option 2 *might* perform better assuming OS & Apps are on one drive and CS scratch is on the other.
Another main constraint is the MBP architecture itself being rather limiting on disk I/O. Personally, I would choose option 2 and then partition off around 48G for dedicated scratch -- the partition just so I could isolate and regularly wipe the temp scratch files CS creates.
-
A decent place to look for info is storagereview.com (http://www.storagereview.com/), plus they have a fairly comprehensive database here (http://www.storagereview.com/Testbed4Compare.sr).
A quick looks shows the OWC Mercury Extreme (http://www.storagereview.com/owc_mercury_extreme_pro_ssd_review_120gb) a favorite.
-
The OWC Mercury Extreme is a Sandforce based SSD, its the same as the Corsair Force, and every dog and his friend who makes/labels SSDs with their name have one, except for Intel and Crucial.
Storagereview.com is an excellent place to look for information on storage ofcourse! :-) as mentioned by Chris_Brown.
The bench mark shown in the link above, confirms what others have said, that there is very little difference between them.
Top SSD disk is currently the C300, then there is the PCIe based SSD's by OCZ and others which is essentially two or more disks without their casing, attached to a raid controller, which in turn will give you x times more speed, some of these are also bootable (on windows!)
I think at the moment you will find very aggressive pricing on the Corsair Force series, so go to newegg or similar and pick out the similar drive and compare.
I know I am planing on using SSD's
Henrik
PS: If you can hang in, Intel will be releasing their 3rd Gen within the next several months (could tell you when, but sooner then later!) considering that current 2nd Gen are keeping up or almost keeping up, with current drives is very encouraging :)
-
Thank you for the responses.
PS: If you can hang in, Intel will be releasing their 3rd Gen within the next several months (could tell you when, but sooner then later!) considering that current 2nd Gen are keeping up or almost keeping up, with current drives is very encouraging :)
Henrik, I'm guessing that (as Jack points out) my MBP would limit any noticeable difference between the current offerings and the upcoming Intel. Would you agree?
A decent place to look for info is storagereview.com (http://www.storagereview.com/), plus they have a fairly comprehensive database here (http://www.storagereview.com/Testbed4Compare.sr).
Thank you Chris; I did not know about this site.
Personally, I would choose option 2 and then partition off around 48G for dedicated scratch -- the partition just so I could isolate and regularly wipe the temp scratch files CS creates.
So this is where I get a bit confused: If I go with this option, what should go on which drive? I was thinking this way:
Drive 1
OS, CS5 and LR
LR catalogs
Documents
Drive 2
Scratch
MS Office
iWorks
No rhyme or reason other than to balance the stuff. Does this make sense?
Dave
-
Hi Dave,
Of the two options that Jack is pointing out, I would choose option two as well.
(boot disk) Have OS and apps
Disk 2, partition as Jack suggested, keep my data and lightroom catalog on the main part
50GB scratch disk partition
Sorry I missed the bit originally about you working from you Macbook Pro, I was thinking Macpro!
All the best
Henrik
-
Zactly -- what Tived clarified. Your original option 2 scenario set up as he described.
-
Well, it's done.
(2) 240g OWC's installed. Applications on one (47g used), documents and scratch on the other which is split 190/50. The documents also have LR catalogs, so there is 78g used out of 190.
I don't have any detailed measuring software other than the Activity Monitor, but before the switch Disk Activity maxed out at about 30mb/s; it is now over 100. It sure is faster opening applications and large files. I did a pano that used to take over 30 minutes in less than 5 minutes. Feels like a completely different computer. Office 2011 opens faster than you can move your fingers from the touchpad to the keys.
Only issue I have is occasional crashes associated with finder and external drives. Not sure what that is about, but I think it has something to do with power to the external drives because I have one eSATA drive that uses its own power supply and it has never crashed with that connected. I have had crashes with USB drives, Firewire drives, and eSATA drives powered through the firewire. I even had a crash with a simple USB jump drive. Probably be unrelated to the new SSD's. Anyway, overall a success. Thank you for your help.
Dave
-
Great news,
Very happy that its working out, it will be interesting to see how your experience has been in a few weeks. because I think we get become speed blind, and what is infront of us will never be fast enough, because we adapt to the environment.
But your measure of 30 vs 100 is a good indicator.
All the best and thanks for sharing
Henrik
-
SSD's don't really need drive bays. Put a square of double sided mounting tape on the thing and stick it anywhere the cables will reach. They're very light, don't move/vibrate, or get hot.. so this works.
Ho Ho!- Yes SSDs do get HOT--my 500 GB SSD Runs cooking with fans ago go with a Big processing out folder.
Des
-
SSD's don't really need drive bays. Put a square of double sided mounting tape on the thing and stick it anywhere the cables will reach. They're very light, don't move/vibrate, or get hot.. so this works.
Ho Ho!- Yes SSDs do get HOT--my 500 GB SSD Runs cooking with fans ago go with a Big processing out folder.
Des
PCIe card SSD? Out of the 4 SSD's I have (intel and crucial) I've never felt them above room temp.. even after extended benchmarking.
Maybe yours is broken and ready to burst into flames.. ;o)