|
I'm looking for a suitable ssd to replace a 1.8" hd in a mid 2009 macbook air (a1304). That revision has sata but the installed hard disk has a weird lif connector on the hd.  What ssd would be best and does anyone know where to get a suitable cable for the motherboard connector to sata? (UK based source preferably)
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2014 12:54
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 8, 2024 08:08 |
|
|
So I'm going to do a clean Windows install this weekend and had a few questions relating to my 840 EVO. The OP says to over provision by only partitioning 80% of the drive, but I also read a few pages back that someone posted saying this isn't needed anymore if TRIM is enabled. So what's the deal then? And if I do need to over provision, do I do it on the advertised 500 GB or the actual ~477 GB? Also where did this 20% come from? Why not 10%, or 15%, etc?
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2014 14:42
|
|
|
Boris Galerkin posted:So I'm going to do a clean Windows install this weekend and had a few questions relating to my 840 EVO. The OP says to over provision by only partitioning 80% of the drive, but I also read a few pages back that someone posted saying this isn't needed anymore if TRIM is enabled. So what's the deal then? And if I do need to over provision, do I do it on the advertised 500 GB or the actual ~477 GB? Also where did this 20% come from? Why not 10%, or 15%, etc? Don't over provision, but don't fill the drive past 80%.
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2014 14:47
|
|
|
jre posted:I'm looking for a suitable ssd to replace a 1.8" hd in a mid 2009 macbook air (a1304). You can get the Mercury Aura - http://eshop.macsales.com/item/OWC/SSDAPMB120/ It's expensive (over $1/GB) because it's not very common, and you can probably find an alternative on eBay.
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2014 14:55
|
|
|
Well good news, I updated my samsung evo software using the built in update and it worked fine. Rebooted twice with no problems. Rapid is still enabled.
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2014 16:59
|
|
|
TheRationalRedditor posted:drat, sounds like I lucked out on Magician 4.5 when it updated fine. I downloaded the .exe but then decided to use the in-program update instead, if that makes any difference at all. Other way around for me. The built-in updater wouldn't work so I had to use the installer on Samsung's website. But it's working fine.
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2014 18:53
|
|
|
Boris Galerkin posted:So I'm going to do a clean Windows install this weekend and had a few questions relating to my 840 EVO. The OP says to over provision by only partitioning 80% of the drive, but I also read a few pages back that someone posted saying this isn't needed anymore if TRIM is enabled. So what's the deal then? And if I do need to over provision, do I do it on the advertised 500 GB or the actual ~477 GB? Also where did this 20% come from? Why not 10%, or 15%, etc? Over provisioning by partitioning is for older OSes without TRIM support. With TRIM just leave 20%-ish free, but if you happen to fill up the drive more it's not the end of the world. There's no hard and fast rule for how much you should leave free, but if you leave very little free it'll hurt performance and the lifespan of the drive because, to simplify, it will have to move data around more often to allow for new writes. The 500GB/477GB are actually the same size. Drive manufacturer's report in GB, and the drive actually has 512GB of NAND, while Windows and most OSes report GiB, and 512GB = 477GiB. In Windows I'd just move some files to other drives if you have significantly less than 90GiB of free space left, don't worry too much about it.
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2014 23:21
|
|
|
Actually, a 512 GB SSD generally is actually a 512 GiB drive. It just sets aside an amount equal to the GB/GiB difference as spare area for an automatic at-least-7% over-provisioning. OP percentages come from an IBM labs study on ideal SSD performance per percentage of spare area, without TRIM. More free space is always better, but 20-30% avoids the worst-case behavior on the worst-case drive, which is over 10x write amplification with a proportional drop in performance.
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2014 23:36
|
|
|
So a fairly unique situation where I'm looking to put in an SSD. There's a machine hooked up to a scientific instrument (specifically it looks like it photographs core samples). It generates images that can be up to 400mb, and then they have to get moved around a bit. There's currently a delay when the images are written or manipulated, hence why they're looking at SSDs. Currently there are two 1TB drives, mirrored with Intel Onboard RAID. I'm not sure if the mirror is for performance or uptime (the data is backed up elsewhere but uptime is a concern), but I think both. They generate a lot of data, so they'd like to keep that capacity. And probably want to keep mirrors. I'm thinking like the Samsung EVOs won't work because they won't have the sustained performance to really excel with such large files. So I'm looking at the Samsung Pro drives. But if we keep them in RAID will the AHCI TRIM stuff still work or will I want an Intel drive that can TRIM itself? Or maybe someone knows some way I can mirror the SSD to an HDD without impacting performance? I'm not really sure what the budget is here or if $1500 worth of SSDs are doable.
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2014 05:29
|
|
|
I don't believe TRIM functions on any RAID 1 controllers currently, except for experimental support on Linux softraid (the drives will manually TRIM via a command, but not otherwise). Currently, the best way around it is to pick a drive that doesn't give much of a crap about TRIM, like an Intel DC S3500 or S3700. Give them a little overprovisioning on top of their natural OP and just let them be. The S3700 is extreme durability, meant to be constantly randomly rewritten for e.g. datacenter databases. The S3500 is probably more than enough durability. For this use, I think a Samsung 850 Pro would work just as well as a DC S3500, but the warranty might not cover this kind of use.
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2014 05:51
|
|
|
The use case seems to be fill up the drive with images, which if it's being used continuously (and it's not always used continuously) takes about two weeks. And from what I'm reading it seems like even consumer SSDs are in the Petabytes of write longevity, so considering that worst case we're writing 25TB a year, even a regular SSD should be able to keep up on that front. So the only reason I'd want to get something more than the 840 EVO is that the 840 is better in short bursts than sustained writes, right? And I guess I'm also wondering if maybe I could get a much smaller SSD and set it up as a cache device with Intel RST? I don't really want to lose the redundancy.
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2014 08:33
|
|
|
Are there many companies that make the mini msata ssd? Only found one or two and the prices are big more expensive than regular ssd but I assume that is because of the smaller form factor. Mydigitalssd and emperor are the only two brands I see. Anyone know if they are reliable at all? Asking because I bought a Asus 303la and it has an empty slot for one.
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2014 17:14
|
|
|
There are definitely more manufacturers of mSata SSDs. Sadly it seems the slot in your laptop might be half size (doublecheck this please), which rules out the 840EVO mSata. Sandisk is the most familiar name I see after a quick GIS.
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2014 17:25
|
|
|
Flipperwaldt posted:There are definitely more manufacturers of mSata SSDs. Sadly it seems the slot in your laptop might be half size (doublecheck this please), which rules out the 840EVO mSata. Sorry when I said msata mini I meant msata half size otherwise like you said there are many options.
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2014 17:28
|
|
|
Going to head to Frys in a bit to pick up a SSD. Is the recommendation still an Intel 530 Series over the Samsung 840 Evo? Also, whats the difference between the different models of 840 Evo's? Looks like Frys has a desktop kit, international kit, .85", 2.5", and the prices vary between them.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2014 14:57
|
|
|
blk96gt posted:Going to head to Frys in a bit to pick up a SSD. Is the recommendation still an Intel 530 Series over the Samsung 840 Evo? Also, whats the difference between the different models of 840 Evo's? Looks like Frys has a desktop kit, international kit, .85", 2.5", and the prices vary between them. Everyone recommended me the 840 Evo. e: This was after saying I could get the same Intel SSDs for the same price as the 840 EVOs. Boris Galerkin fucked around with this message at 15:45 on Dec 13, 2014 |
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2014 15:06
|
|
|
Boris Galerkin posted:Everyone recommended me the 840 Evo. I was planning on the 240gb, and the OP recommended the Intel until the firmware issues with the 840 were fixed. The post hadn't been updated since September so just wanted to check before I bought the wrong thing.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2014 15:17
|
|
|
Well, as far as we know, knock on wood, the firmware issues got fixed. You might have to update it yourself once, but it whouldn't be too much of a hassle. So we're back at the 840 EVO for the recommended drive for modern computers with a recent Windows OS as far as price/performance/reliability is concerned, I think. The Intel drive is good, but the price usually makes it less attractive. The difference between the kits is the included accessories, like a bracket that makes the 2.5" drive fit a 3.5" drivebay in a desktop or a usb to sata cable to help you clone your laptop's HDD. Things like that. The drive is the same anyway.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2014 15:43
|
|
|
blk96gt posted:Going to head to Frys in a bit to pick up a SSD. Remember your best buys are always at Frys.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2014 17:34
|
|
|
Edit: I don't know why I didn't just check to see if the one the OP recommended supported eDrive. I got the impression somewhere that eDrive was a rarer thing. Time to get an 850 Pro.
ejstheman fucked around with this message at 05:56 on Dec 14, 2014 |
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2014 21:11
|
|
|
The 840 EVO supports that stuff, TCG Opal and whatnot. It's a Good Drive.FISHMANPET posted:The use case seems to be fill up the drive with images, which if it's being used continuously (and it's not always used continuously) takes about two weeks. And from what I'm reading it seems like even consumer SSDs are in the Petabytes of write longevity, so considering that worst case we're writing 25TB a year, even a regular SSD should be able to keep up on that front. The "burst" amount on the 840 EVO only refers to writes, and even then it can still absorb at least 3 GB of them before it drops to the lower speeds (which are still decently above a platter drive). On the 1 TB model, it's a 12 GB buffer. Using a smaller SSD as a cache device wouldn't work too well. It'd take writes, sure, but reads back out wouldn't be accelerated because the read caching depends on frequently-accessed data. Intel SRT caching can't be combined with a RAID array, so that option's out.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2014 23:05
|
|
|
As far as I can tell the 850 EVO in non crazy person sizes is only about 20 dollars more - are we still suggesting 840s by default or should people get an 850?
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2014 04:02
|
|
|
Factory Factory posted:The 840 EVO supports that stuff, TCG Opal and whatnot. It's a Good Drive. So Cache is out, because among other reasons, I don't have a Z68 chipset. Also, I think I'm just going to add the SSD as a secondary drive rather than the system drive. It looks like the 850 doesn't have the TurboWrite buffer, but it will still be fast. Based on the amount of data being written, it seems like the 840 EVO isn't the best choice, as it doesn't have a listed TBW but it only has a 3 year warranty. Even if it is $200 more, the 850 PRO isn't a bad choice.
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2014 04:53
|
|
|
The Lord Bude posted:As far as I can tell the 850 EVO in non crazy person sizes is only about 20 dollars more - are we still suggesting 840s by default or should people get an 850? In general the OP usually waits until a drive has had some stress testing done and been around for a little while before recommending it. Considering that the 850 Pro hasn't had any issues that I know of yet, I'd be comfortable telling someone to get a 850 EVO. That recommendation would be based on good experience with the brand, though, not any hard data, which is a bad way to evaluate hardware. Alereon hasn't been around much during the last couple of weeks and the decision is his, though.
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2014 05:29
|
|
|
What is this SSHD thing that Seagate are spruiking? My HTPC needs a new OS Drive as it's ground to a halt, would something like this be suitabl or should I just get an SSD?
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2014 11:04
|
|
|
xcore posted:What is this SSHD thing that Seagate are spruiking? The SSHD is a platter hard disk with a few gigs of ssd flash to make them a little faster. They're a bit faster than a HD but nowhere close to a SSD. I'd just get a SSD for the system install unless I wanted a single large disk for system and also media in which case I'd look at a SSHD.
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2014 11:09
|
|
|
SSHDs are platter drives with a few gigs of NAND flash acting as a buffer, same thing as the stuff Apple is sticking in their iMacs and calling "Hybrid drives" now. They are better than traditional harddrives when it comes to Being Harddrives, but they are poo poo at Being SSDs because they are not SSDs. efb
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2014 12:49
|
|
|
Does anyone know how to get the total bytes written on a retina MBP (2012) ssd? Just curious.
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2014 13:03
|
|
|
The Lord Bude posted:As far as I can tell the 850 EVO in non crazy person sizes is only about 20 dollars more - are we still suggesting 840s by default or should people get an 850? There looks to be no appreciable benefit to buying the 850 Evo over the 840 for real-world consumer use.
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2014 13:05
|
|
|
Instant Grat posted:SSHDs are platter drives with a few gigs of NAND flash acting as a buffer, same thing as the stuff Apple is sticking in their iMacs and calling "Hybrid drives" now. They are better than traditional harddrives when it comes to Being Harddrives, but they are poo poo at Being SSDs because they are not SSDs. Same thing as Apple Hybrid drives? Seagate Hybrid drives are single-slot and have only 8 GB NAND cache. Apple Fusion drives are two-slot and have 128 GB of NAND cache. This almost always ensures that their OS and many/most of their applications stay on the SSD part and may never experience the slowness of the HDD. A user can create their own Fusion drive with any size SSD + HDD, so you could have something like 250GB or 500GB of NAND "cache". Malcolm XML posted:There looks to be no appreciable benefit to buying the 850 Evo over the 840 for real-world consumer use. Didn't AnandTech say they had almost double durability (back to near MLC levels of write-endurance) and better write consistency speeds than the 840 EVO?
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2014 13:51
|
|
|
Xenomorph posted:Same thing as Apple Hybrid drives? Yeah but a typical consumer is never going to write-out an 840 EVO and most of us didn't even notice when the 840s were slowing down due to that wear-leveling bug. You basically had to run benchmarks to tell.
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2014 17:03
|
|
|
If you have a Microcenter close you can swing by and pick up a 240GB Intel 730 for $90 right now. A client of mine had a drive crap out so I was planning on picking up an 840 EVO but this price was too good to pass up.
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2014 01:32
|
|
|
mAlfunkti0n posted:If you have a Microcenter close you can swing by and pick up a 240GB Intel 730 for $90 right now. A client of mine had a drive crap out so I was planning on picking up an 840 EVO but this price was too good to pass up. Just FYI, the 240GB 730's writes are abysmal (for a recent-gen SSD). Found that out the hard way. The good news is, you don't notice it since the reads are fine.
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2014 01:45
|
|
|
BIG HEADLINE posted:Just FYI, the 240GB 730's writes are abysmal (for a recent-gen SSD). Found that out the hard way. Yeah for this I wasn't concerned about performance as long as it was better than any HDD I could throw in (it will be), and for my client I wanted something a bit more reliable than the Seagate that died.
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2014 01:48
|
|
|
The SSD is still faster than not-ssd and has that data-loss protection on power loss.
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2014 04:53
|
|
|
I think for $90 I wouldn't hesitate to run two of those drives in RAID 0. Yes, you double your chance for failure, but Intel's failure stats they give for that drive (0.1% into the last 7 months of 2013) means that even a RAID 0 is far more reliable than a mechanical drive.
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2014 05:36
|
|
|
Malcolm XML posted:Does anyone know how to get the total bytes written on a retina MBP (2012) ssd? Just curious. step 1: install MacPorts step 2: sudo port install smartmontools step 3: sudo /opt/local/sbin/update-smart-drivedb step 4: smartctl -A /dev/disk0 Attributes 174 and 175 should show up as Host_Reads_MiB and Host_Writes_MiB respectively. This may not work with all possible rMBP SSDs, but it did on my Samsung-built 512GB.
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2014 06:32
|
|
|
I got an Evo from Amazon on a cyber Monday sale, what are the odds that I don't have to run the performance restoration software? I haven't been able to find any Official documentation and I don't want to screw my drive up when I'm just beginning to love it. I went to their download page and grabbed the "Dos version for MAC, Linux users" ISO and burned it to a disk; I should be able to just boot off the disk and follow the prompts right?
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2014 17:01
|
|
|
Runt the perf restoration software anyways. It's the only way tot check whether you have the updated firmware.
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2014 18:59
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 8, 2024 08:08 |
|
|
Trip report: I had to not only enable "legacy boot" but also explicitly disable UEFI boot. Of course those two options weren't anywhere close to each other in the BIOS. Other than that it was a very straight forward process, although once the update is finished it dumped me back to the command line, I wish it would print a message saying "Ok you won't brick your system if you power it off now". All in all a pretty reasonable update, less than 5 minutes. 8/10 would increase performance again.
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2014 20:21
|
|