Error: Twitter did not respond. Please wait a few minutes and refresh this page.
A tons of reviews and tips about technology product, software and hardware.
I have a surprise for you. Ho well… It’s not really a surprise since I’ve put that in the title and google analytics told me that there is about 91.89% of chances that you got here by googling “Apple SSD Benchmark”. Anyway, I’ve run a couples of test and the results are just astonishing. Here they are:
And that’s it, they’re already gone! That’s just how fast it is. I think the only way it could get faster is to boot directly from RAM! (Ho! That’s giving me an idea…) No seriously here is some figures:
Boot time is just under 17 seconds on OS X 10.6.2 and under 25 for Windows 7. This is blazing fast. But that’s just uninteresting suff. You see, when you boot your computer, you can go get a coffee or anything while it work. So this is hardly a time saver. On the other side, that next one is going to be of big help.
Safari‘s startup time is so small that you don’t even care. In fact, I couldn’t time it by hand. So, I went lazy and just didn’t done it. You’ll have to do with some words. There is simply no differences between opening Safari 4 and opening a new tab. That’s how fast it is.
Photoshop CS 4, on the other side, is a bit slow. You have to count up to 4 before you can work in it. In fact, this is the slowest application that I’ve tested. There is just nothing slower than that. I think it pretty much guarantee a 4 seconds or less for just about anything.
If you can, get one… don’t. As fast as it look, the Apple SSD cost a lot and has not much to offer. It doesn’t support TRIM nor does it have a garbage collector. That means that it will keep on slowing as you use it down to half it’s original speed. That’s very bad for a $ 600 option (MacBook Pro 13″) or even a $ 200 one (MacBook Pro 17″).
By now, you’ve also realized that there is no way to get one in the Mac Pro without getting it out from a MacBook which mean it is now a $ 2000 upgrade. This is extremely costly, specially when you can get the Vertex for around $ 350.
That’s it! See you next week for some other great news.
And it’s bad new
I have three very big project going on at school and the only thing I want to do next is kill myself. The bad new is not that I’ll die, it’s that I will not be able to write on my blog! I already switched to a 1-time-per-2-week schedule but it’s still not enough. So, don’t be surprised if you don’t hear about me for a while.
On the bright side
Do you remember, about 4 months ago I did some benchmarks of the samsung in my MacBook Pro? If you don’t, take a look here as it is like seeing the god of awesomeness. Anyway, here’s the big new: In that post, I said that I’d try to move the SSD in my Mac Pro to see how it stand aside the RAID. Well… It’s not going to happen today BUT… The SSD is now securely plugged in the Mac Pro with a handmade adapter built from the original Apple 320 GB HDD.
So as everything couldn’t get better, I’ll give you some early eyes-taken results that will make you lick your floor: safari open in half the time it was doing on the laptop and iTunes even faster. But wait! There’s more! My iTunes library is stored on my server which leverage the old RAID array and is connected using a gigabit link and it is STILL faster than the RAID alone!
Anyway, I’ll give some results when I’ll have some time to do the benchmarks. Now, I’ve go to go coding…
Updated 30 June 2009 13:20
Benchmarking of the MacBook Pro 15″
Last time we talked about virtual performances. Now, it’s time to talk about the real stuff. Let’s do some real world benchmarks! I’ll start with a basic boot time comparison between the Mac Pro, the MacBook Pro 13″ with standard HDD and the MacBook Pro 15″ with SSD. I’ll then test multiple applications startup at the same time and the lunch time of some major applications like Photoshop. The specs of both every computers are supposed to be on my blog.
|MacBook Pro 15″
|MacBook 13″ Alu
5400 RPM HDD
|Mac Pro 2008
4x Seagate 7200.11 HDDs
|Fastest||30.624 sec.||48.121 sec.||73.806 sec.|
|Slowest||30.989 sec.||52.506 sec.||82.113 sec.|
|Average of 3||30.825 sec.||50.07 sec.||77.467 sec.|
|Safari 4.0.1||0.678 sec.||2.231 sec.||2.124 sec.|
|iPhoto 8.0.3||1.864 sec.||7.238 sec.||9.877 sec.|
|iTunes 8.2||1.315 sec.||7.192 sec.||5.322 sec.|
|iMovie 8.0.3||3.391 sec.||11.538 sec.||6.394 sec.|
|Photoshop 10.0.1||3.732 sec.||12.372 sec.||6.64 sec.|
|Pages 4.0.2||1.023 sec.||9.715 sec.||3.25 sec.|
|All of the above
|6.238 sec.||64.245 sec.||24.116 sec.|
Wow! I’d like to add that the boot time is the physical boot time. It combine EFI and OS X boot time. The system was considered booted when the desktop, dock and menu bar was visible and accepting interactions. The time for the EFI to startup is about 12 seconds. It should remain the same for whatever MacBook Pro you have. On the other side, OS X 10.5.7 did boot in 18 seconds which is blazing fast! The Mac Pro EFI needed about 40 seconds to power up since the RAID card start evey disk one after the other to reduce power stress on the power supply. Even with this 28 seconds gap, the MacBook Pro surpassed the Mac Pro by 18.642 seconds.
An other interesting fact is that it take half the time to start every applications at the same time compared to starting them individually. This fact point that the mass storage device (Apple SSD in this case) is not the bottle-neck of this computer. The fact that it is exactly half the time shows us that the CPU is the one slowing everything. When I started multiple applications at once, I took advantage of it’s multi-core architecture thus executing 2x more information at the same time.
The SSD option is definitely worth it. If you want a fast, silent and tough computer, it’s the first thing to get. I can’t imagine what one of those SSDs can do in the Mac Pro. It would surely be a screamer! Let’s say that it’s defenitly in my plan to do so. I will probably post a follow up when it will happen. In the mean time, let’s wait for the videos of those benchmarks and the review of my new iPhone 3G S. See you next week.
Update 30 June 2009 11:52
Those benchmarks might appear incomplete to you so, if you are interested in a specific value that is not present in the list, just ask using whatever means of communication you’d prefer. I’m also open to suggestions about hardware comparison.