Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

SSD Buying Guide [part 2]

Status
The first post of this thread is a WikiPost and can be edited by anyone with the appropiate permissions. Your edits will be public.
CLJ said:
That'd be great!
Would surely save me hours of fishing and sifting around looking the stuff up....
Click to expand...
Ok, from what I read and learned by doing a couple DIY fusion drive setups, here’s some helpful stuff for you. While some say you can create a fusion drive with one connected externally, I do not recommend this. I created fusion drives with my mid 2010 MBP 13" (MacBookPro7,1) and a friend’s 2011 MBP 17”. I used a data doubler kit from OWC to add second internal drive, but, ifixit.com has a similar unit. OWC has some great videos for installing anything for each specific mac line, either on their site or their youtube channel (links below).

Optical drive: When you remove your optical drive from your MBP, while you can get an external box and connect via USB when you need it, you will not be able to play DVDs using DVD Player app. You will, however, be able to play them using VLC or that other mac video player app (can’t recall the name ATM).

Some preparation:
First off, make a bootable USB thumb drive with version of OS X you will be using, easy way here: http://liondiskmaker.com

After installing both drives, format each, using 1 partition, be sure to use GUID partition table and Mac OS X Journaled (regular). If you use a multi-boot system where you use Windows, you will not be able to do a DIY fusion drive. (It is not recommended to create a fusion drive from multi-partitioned drives.)

Before creating the fusion drive, if you want a recovery partition on your HDD, first install OS X on the HDD. When you select the disks for your fusion drive, don’t just use disk0 disk1 as in most instructions you will find, be sure to select the sub-partition that does not include the recovery sub-partition (marked Apple_HFS), (in the example pic below, if disk0 is your HDD, select disk0s2). (The recovery partition will start with Apple_Boot and be 650MB in size.) Then, when you create the fusion drive, while it will erase the data, it will retain the recovery partition. Once you create the fusion drive and install OS X, you can either do a clean install or merge from a backup.

As far as the fusion drive goes, it doesn’t matter where you physically install each drive, what does matter is that you specify your SSD as the first drive in the logical group when you create the fusion drive. I.E., if, in the pic below, your HDD is disk0, SSD disk1, your command line would look like this: diskutil cs create MyFusionDrive disk1 disk0s2.

Also, be sure to have a backup solution. If you have a problem with one of the drives, you will need to “revert” or “delete" the fusion drive, and when you do, you will lose all your data. A fusion drive is not a cache system, it is a file management system, so, frequently used files will be stored on the SSD, not frequently will be stored on the HDD, but, otherwise, as far as apps go, OS X treats the fusion drive as a single drive (apps only see one drive, OS X handles which physical drive files land on, on a system level, apps are unaware of the two drives).

Note: Keep in mind, if you see the “CoreStorage” terminal command, “cs” is shorthand for “CoreStorage” and can be used interchangeably.

Ok, here’s the easy directions:
http://www.appleexaminer.com/MacsAndOS/Recommendations/FusionDrive/FusionDrive.html


Here are more notes if you want to read more on the subject. Keep in mind, most of this material is 1-2 years old, but, still relevant.

http://blog.macsales.com/17624-os-x...tup-option-for-non-fusion-drive-equipped-macshttp://www.macworld.com/article/2014011/how-to-make-your-own-fusion-drive.html
http://www.cnet.com/how-to/how-to-make-a-custom-corestorage-drive-in-os-x/
http://macs.about.com/od/diyguidesprojects/ss/Setting-Up-A-Fusion-Drive-On-Your-Current-Mac.htm
http://www.zdnet.com/article/more-on-diy-fusion-drives/
http://blog.macsales.com/19994-further-fusion-testing
http://hints.macworld.com/article.php?story=2014030311173257
http://www.xlr8yourmac.com/feedback/FusionDriveDIYmacpro.html
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2013/11/26/cold_fusion_revisited_on_a_vintage_macbook_pro/?page=1

Note: I created fusion drives with Mavericks, and it still works fine after upgrading to Yosemite on both machines.

For swapping your optical drive for an HDD/SSD:
OWC’s “laptop center” : http://eshop.macsales.com/shop/powerbook-ibook-macbook/
OWC’s installation videos: http://eshop.macsales.com/installvideos/
or at youtube: https://www.youtube.com/user/OWCmacsales/playlists?sort=dd&shelf_id=1&view=50
OWC also sells an external USB case you can put your optical drive into.
 

Attachments

  • diyfusiondiskuti-100012834-large.png
    diyfusiondiskuti-100012834-large.png
    112.4 KB · Views: 312
benji888 YOU ROCK!!!

Thank you so much for this. Absolutely briliant!
You have shaved hours and days of weeding through web trying to see what is possible and what might, or might not work.

I'll give an update after I rig my MPB up.
Looking forward to it.

Huge massive thanks!

Cheers,
Chris

benji888 said:
Ok, from what I read and learned by doing a couple DIY fusion drive setups, here’s some helpful stuff for you.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited by a moderator:
skottichan said:
Quick question for anyone who has experience; will OWC's Aurora SSD's work in the 2014 MBP?

If they do, are there any competing SSDs?

I'm kinda wanting to shop around on SSD's before buying a new MBP next month.
Click to expand...
MagicBoy said:
No. There's no third party solution for the late-2013 and 2014 as yet.
Click to expand...
not yet, I'm sure they are still trying, but, they do have an external SSD that takes advantage of USB 3 speeds: http://blog.macsales.com/28102-ces-2015-owc-announces-new-1tb-capacity-envoy-pro-ex-portable-ssd
 
Macbook pro 15 early 2011 and Macbook mid 2010 (last macbook)

Both running sandisk extreme 120gb, but it is time to upgrade for bigger space and maybe better speed.


840EVO 250GB or MX100 256GB ???


I would like to take two 840evo (better overall), but I'm worried about read bug performance.
 
scrmtrey said:
Macbook pro 15 early 2011 and Macbook mid 2010 (last macbook)

Both running sandisk extreme 120gb, but it is time to upgrade for bigger space and maybe better speed.


840EVO 250GB or MX100 256GB ???


I would like to take two 840evo (better overall), but I'm worried about read bug performance.
Click to expand...

If budget allows, you will get a little better read / write speed with a MX100 512GB. That is the drive I have. As to the Evo, many forum members use the drive and have been very happy. Both drives have good reputations.
 
sngx1275 said:
I read the last 2 pages of this thread, and I know the answer is in this forum somewhere, probably a boatload of times. However, for some perhaps not great reasons I ordered a 120 gig OWC Electra drive. TRIM enabled is No under system information in 10.10. Do I need to take the effort to enable it?
Click to expand...

There are several answers you might get to that question and they are all true more or less.

1. Every SSD should benefit from TRIM.
2. No SSD needs TRIM to function.
3. Marketing people will tell you: Our SSD "just works" with OS X.

You will also get some people tell you that their SSD doesn't need TRIM because it has garbage collection instead. All SSDs have garbage collection and TRIM and garbage collection work together.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Write_amplification#Garbage_collection

I'm not a huge fan of the Sandforce controllers used in the OWC SSDs. Those Sandforce controllers made sense when NAND was slow and expensive. The compression/data de-duplication feature used in the Sandforce based SSDs helped speed up read/write speeds for the slow NAND, for compressible data at least. However the OWC SSDs do appear to have a decent amount of over-provisioning which could be useful if you decide not to run TRIM.

In the end it could depend on your workload. Are you a power user running demanding tasks with high levels of disk I/O or are you a regular user getting an SSD for a little more responsiveness and faster boot times?

If you are in the later category you certainly don't need to enable TRIM.
 
Last edited:
Thanks for your reply.

Well i don't need that many space (512GB). But after heavy research i have decided to go with 850EVO 250GB. (130 EUR here in EU)

A little bit more cash for better stability, endurance and also the speed of this drive is just super great.
 
Some updates from Crucial / Micron:

New MX200 and BX100 SSDs:
http://techreport.com/news/27606/crucial-new-mx200-and-bx100-ssds-are-priced-to-move
http://www.storagereview.com/crucial_mx200_and_bx100_ssds_announced

"The Crucial MX200 SSD is quoted to deliver sequential reads and write up to 555MB/s and 500MB/s respectively as well as random reads and writes up to 100k and 87k IOPS on all file types. Additionally, it is built with an endurance rating up to 320 TBW for the 1TB model, delivering up to five times more endurance than a typical client SSD"
Click to expand...

"The affordable Crucial BX100 is quoted with sequential reads and writes up to 535MB/s and 450MB/s on all file types and features Extreme Energy Efficiency technology, making it two times more energy efficient than a typical hard drive. This allows users to run their systems longer, using less power. The BX100 is the first Crucial drive to include the Silicon Motion SM2246EN controller."
Click to expand...

The MX200 appears to be an improved MX100 with similar controller, but with a pool of SLC cache which should help performance. Perhaps the MX200 might end up being the replacement for the M550 which could be phased out at some stage?

The BX100 appears to be the new budget drive from Crucial with a new (for Crucial) Silicon Motion SM2246EN controller.

Meanwhile the Crucial M550 gets new firmware release MU02. For those people without an optical drive, or those that attempt the CDROM based firmware update without success, I've created a method to EFI boot the M550 MU02 update:

https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/1844323/
 
Last edited:
planning on buying the 850 evo 250gb for my 2011 13' . Is their any problems or concerns i should be worried about? or any better ssd i can buy?

edit: and i would fresh install Yosemite, unless 10.9 is better
 
Last edited:
superpooh487 said:
planning on buying the 850 evo 250gb for my 2011 13' . Is their any problems or concerns i should be worried about? or any better ssd i can buy?
Click to expand...

same question here.

also will i have issues if i upgrade to 10.10 or should i stay on 10.9? :( so many questions.
 
I can confirm that the 850 EVO 256GB SSD works perfect (no trim) in a macbook pro 15" i5 mid 2010.
did the upgrade together with Crucial 8GB ram kit ( CT2C4G3S1067MCEU - PC3-8500 )
Running Yosemite perfectly and very smooth.
The 850 was even less expensive here than the 840.
 
Last edited:
I am happy with 850EVO 250GB version. I am glad that i choose the 850evo and not the 840evo.


Working great with MBP15 early 2011. (write max around 450, read 502)

And also working great with MB13 mid 2010. (write above 200, read above 200)
 
Originally Posted by Weaselboy View Post
That is nothing but marketing speak from OWC. All SSDs benefit from TRIM. If you are concerned about the firmware on the EVO, take a look at the Crucial MX100 that is a very good bargain.
Click to expand...

CLJ said:
Weaselboy,
I need help here. Been reading for hours upon hours here and you seem to have a strong oversight on concerns or issues at play with various SSD upgrades.

At first I was looking into OWC because of a friend's suggestion, then OWC's website states that my MBP would operate best with the 3G SSD instead of a 6G SSD (I want to get the best SSD possible to use after this MBP dies). Seems the OWC 6G SSD has an issue with certain macs that drops the SATA link speed down to 1.5Gbps (even though they are rated higher at 3Gbps). From what I gather this is due to the SandForce controller OWC uses which creates conflict with my MBP SATA controller (Nvidia MCP79).

Are you aware of these issues with the Nvidia MCP79 SATA Contoller, and which SSDs might work best in my situation?

MBP(5,3) 15" mid 2009 running 10.9.5
2.8 GHz Intel Core 2 Duo
8GB RAM

NVidia MCP79 AHCI:
Link Speed: 3 Gigabit
Negotiated Link Speed: 3 Gigabit

Based on reading through pages here it looks like the Crucial MX100 is a good contender.

FYI I'm currently running 10.9.5 on this MBP and on an iMac mid 2007 (2.4 GHz Intel Core 2 Duo, 4 GB RAM) and won't upgrade to Yosemite, until that iMac can be replaced (another year), so my "apple system" has coherence.

Thanks in advance for any light you can shed my way!
Cheers,
Chris


NVidia MCP79 issues
http://blogs.helsinki.fi/tuylaant/2014/01/upgrading-old-macs-to-ssds/

OWC 6G SSD
http://eshop.macsales.com/item/OWC/SSD7E6G480/

CRUCIAL MX100
http://www.amazon.com/Crucial-MX100...00SSD1/dp/B00KFAGCUM/ref=cm_cr_pr_product_top
Click to expand...


O.M.G my head is spinning, I've been days researching SSD's and the Yosemite issue of trim or not to trim and now the MCP79 Nvdia issue is added to the mix.
I have a mid 2009 MBP 13" model 5.5 that has the same Nvidia issue, I currently have the Crucial MX200 @ 250 GB and (2) 4GB ram upgrade sitting in my shopping cart on the Crucial website but now I am confused "again" because of the MCP79 thing, am I better off with the MX100 or the even older M500 to ensure I get the 3.0 SATA link speed and NOT 1.5???? :(
 
As an Amazon Associate, MacRumors earns a commission from qualifying purchases made through links in this post.
Jeanne-W said:
O.M.G my head is spinning, I've been days researching SSD's and the Yosemite issue of trim or not to trim and now the MCP79 Nvdia issue is added to the mix.
I have a mid 2009 MBP 13" model 5.5 that has the same Nvidia issue, I currently have the Crucial MX200 @ 250 GB and (2) 4GB ram upgrade sitting in my shopping cart on the Crucial website but now I am confused "again" because of the MCP79 thing, am I better off with the MX100 or the even older M500 to ensure I get the 3.0 SATA link speed and NOT 1.5???? :(
Click to expand...

Crucial M550, MX100 and MX200 all use the same Marvell 88SS9189 controller.
Crucial M500 used the older Marvell 88SS9187 controller.

I don't think there is any reason to think the SATA speed negotiation issue will be better or worse between the MX100 and MX200. Probably no different to the M500 either.
 
FWIW, I just read a review of the new Crucial SSDs and they mentioned that the older M500 were on the old 20nm die which would they indicated would give the old M500 a longevity advantage over the MX100s new 16nm die.
 
sarge said:
FWIW, I just read a review of the new Crucial SSDs and they mentioned that the older M500 were on the old 20nm die which would they indicated would give the old M500 a longevity advantage over the MX100s new 16nm die.
Click to expand...

The M550 is also 20nm NAND. I suspect we will see all or most of the consumer SSDs go to 16nm over the next year or two. Crucial (owned by Micron) have their own NAND, so are a little ahead of some of the others.

Samsung who also make their own NAND are taking a different approach with TLC NAND. Sandisk are also using TLC NAND in some of their drives. Perhaps there will soon be just a few remaining "Pro" models with 20nm MLC NAND.
 
I've been reading and reading, but can't find any info on which SSD would fit my A1502 MacBook Pro, thinking of upgrading to at least 512GB, could any of you post me a link to where I can look it up? /or recommend a SSD that would fit
:)
 
Runnernorth said:
I've been reading and reading, but can't find any info on which SSD would fit my A1502 MacBook Pro, thinking of upgrading to at least 512GB, could any of you post me a link to where I can look it up? /or recommend a SSD that would fit
:)
Click to expand...

That is a Retina model and so far nobody makes an aftermarket flash drive for those. You can find some OEM Apple drives on eBay that people have pulled out of their MacBooks, but if you are looking for the 512GB that may prove a rare find.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back