- Ssd disk macbook pro mid 2010 install#
- Ssd disk macbook pro mid 2010 upgrade#
- Ssd disk macbook pro mid 2010 full#
- Ssd disk macbook pro mid 2010 series#
- Ssd disk macbook pro mid 2010 free#
Ssd disk macbook pro mid 2010 upgrade#
My memory monitor shows all the ram being used/reserved all the time (as it should be - unused ram is a waste) so while 8GB is a huge upgrade over the pathetic original supplied, 16 is not wasted, although it will consume more power if that is an issue for you.Īnother somewhat riskier improvement to performance and lifespan is cleaning and replacing the heatsink compound on the CPU, and if you're keen, polishing the CPU first to improve the heat transfer. The geekbench scores now are over 11000 with over 500MBs for the sandisk ultra II that was 2/3 the price of the Samsung, and I was lucky enough to get 16GB of 1600MHz Crucial ram for $69 last year. Before I did the upgrades, my late 2011 17" 2.4 i7 was infuriatingly slow (I think the original drive was faulty as speed tests would only result in 40-45MBs), but now the only reason I would consider a new MBP is for a retina screen and the ability to natively run a 4-5K monitor, and then only the 2013-2015 as the SSDs are still replaceable on them. As others have said, the SSD will make the biggest improvement, but everything helps.
Ssd disk macbook pro mid 2010 series#
While the 2010 series are not the fastest, installing a good quality (major brand) SSD and maxing the ram (up to 16GB) make a huge difference to performance.
Ssd disk macbook pro mid 2010 full#
Thus: even if you're stuck on SATA2 and thus can't run the SSD at its full speed, in the real world, a solid state drive will just destroy a hard disk in most typical workloads. thats a fairly pessimistic case, but much closer to real world than the peak throughput numbers of the HD and SSD may suggest. But note that the SSD is still 100x faster than the HDD in that scenario.
The SSD will be much much faster still.īoth of those numbers (for 4k) are WAY lower than the maximum SATA2 bus speed. If your IOs are 8k or 64k or whatever just multiply out with that instead of 4k. at 4k each (again, worst case, for comparison to illustrate the point vs. A bit faster if they're larger IOs.ĭue to no moving parts, SSDs can do upwards of 5,000-10,000 totally random IOs per second (some, many many times that under certain inflated number circumstances). at 4k each IO (worst case scenario - an app is doing lots of small IO operations), that's say 400 kilobytes per second. They can only do maybe 70-100 totally random IOs per second (this is due to the rotational latency for one side of the disc to reach the read/write head, based on 7200pm drives). Much of the IO workload on your mac will be small 4k to 64k sort of size IOs, and randomly accessed across the disk.ĭue to the physical movement required to reach random parts of the hard disk, hard drives SUCK at this. Some basic simplified scenario maths to illustrate. Real world things just don't happen that way. The peak numbers are streaming large continuous file reads or writes or LARGE IO sizes. You can't just look at the peak throughput numbers, because in the real world, a hard drive just won't hit those numbers whereas an SSD will get much closer. Yeah, this is the thing about storage and comparing SSD vs HDD. enjoy the last days of laptops with user-servicable parts :-( Fitting that is a bit harder than the HD, but not bad. Won't speed things up per se but might mean you can get away with just a 256 or even 128GB SSD - most of the speed-up comes from having the system and apps on the SSD.
Ssd disk macbook pro mid 2010 install#
The other thing to consider - if you don't use the optical drive much - is a Data Doubler (or similar) that will let you install a SSD and keep the old HD (for bulky/rarely used/non speed-critical files).
Ssd disk macbook pro mid 2010 free#
With RAM, its worth checking if you need it - MacOS will always grab 3/4 of your free RAM for caching, so you need to look at "memory pressure" and "swap used" in Activity Monitor to see if low memory really is a problem.
I've used both a Crucial MX100 and Sandisk Ultra II in my "backup" Mid 2010 13" MBP (Whenever I need the "backup" Mac, I panic-buy a SSD to make it usable - then after a few months I steal the SSD for another project and put the old HD back in.)įitting is an absolute doddle, but I second the motion to make sure you have the right screwdrivers. As others have said, though, its not worth paying a fortune for a super-fast model for an old machine (although you don't need to hunt down an old SATA-2 drive). SSD is still the best bet for giving your machine a new lease of life.
0 kommentar(er)
