4 ms·
Sadly, no performance data is provided.
by DenisM 17y ago
Sadly, no performance data is provided.
- Luyt 17y agoBut these are not tweaks to optimize performance - they're for reducing the number of writes to the SSD somewhat. Now that I think of it, one could indeed view those writes as a performance metric (better being: less writes).
- DenisM 17y agoIs it really better, or is it just a fell-good thing? What if reducing number of writes has no practical consequences at all? There is no data provided to judge either way.
- scott_s 17y agoCells in an SSD have a finite number of writes. But some brief Googling convinced me that with current drives, the number of writes a cell can take is not a concern even for heavy use.
- lanaer 17y agoWhen an SSD modifies a page, it has to erase & rewrite the entire block. SSDs try to avoid this by marking the block as “free” and writing data to an entirely different block, if one is available. The point here is that in order to write a tiny bit of data, SSDs have to write to a larger portion of the drive (usually). So reducing the # of tiny writes should lengthen the lifetime of the drive. It's theory, but the theory is sound enough to me to optimize for it if there's little or no downside to the optimizations. Edit: though, as noted elsewhere, these drives will generally last more than long enough, so the effort is probably unnecessary.
- barredo 17y agoHere's a link to a more recent post in other blog http://damieng.com/blog/2010/04/09/macbook-pro-upgrade-to-crucial-256gb-ssd http://damieng.com/blog/2010/04/09/macbook-pro-upgrade-to-cr... — Author switched original 320GB MacbookPro HDD with a Crucial 256GB SSD, it provides benchmarks and compared perfomance and an interesting points: Don’t go with Apple’s factory-options for an SSD as they use slower Samsung drives and charge a premium for it which is unacceptable especially given how easy they are to replace. Which I hope, if true, Apple will fix by adding high-end SSD options in the near future
- blasdel 17y agoIntel only sells their awesome SSDs retail, as demand far outstrips their inconsistent supply. When they get their production up and start offering them to OEMs, expect Apple to start using them. I don't see Apple using any of the mediocre inconsistently-performing Taiwanese SSDs.
- Andys 17y agoIIRC, Apple's very first SSD offerings were based on Intel SSDs. The move to Samsung came when Apple decided to go leadfree/halogenfree/eco-friendly and the Intel chips didnt have the correct qualifications.
- blasdel 17y agoI don't think so, I'm pretty sure the first Macbook Air was released before Intel's public efforts, the performance was pretty mediocre (not better across the board than a 2.5" laptop HD, only the terrible 1.8" iPod HD that would fit), and Apple has had multi-billion-dollar contracts with Samsung for flash memory since the iPod nano.
- PStamatiou 17y agoFor what it's worth, here's a link to my review/how to of an X25-M G2 RAID 0 array on my MacBook Pro with some basic benchmarks: http://paulstamatiou.com/how-to-apple-macbook-pro-raid-0-array-with-2-intel-x25-m-ssds http://paulstamatiou.com/how-to-apple-macbook-pro-raid-0-arr...