Installing SSD and more RAM options

Hi Guys,

Just got a new 13'' Macbook Pro 2011 the basic model with 4GB of RAM and i5 processor.

My question is what RAM can I use in this system? Can I use 2x4GB Sticks of Kingston Hyper X Ram?

What limitations do I have with SSD, for example what SATA ports are in this notebook, I'd like to put in the fastest one I can.

Thanks

 

Ram that comes with the laptop is cool!
great lappy u have mate!
anyways, just make sure you check if it is for laptop or desktop, laptop ones are a lot shorter...
Good Luck!

 

I am not really sure what is going on with the reply above mine. The person might as well have just said "nice laptop, goodbye."

You have the option of putting 2-4GB modules in your MBP but you must go with a specific type of RAM. I am not sure what specs the Kingston Hyper X Ram follows. Essentially the RAM that you put in your MBP must fit certain specifications such as latency, voltage, connector type, physical size, and so on. I suggest you search the forums for the type of RAM that you should purchase for your MBP.

I went with Corsair's 8GB DDR3 RAM kit for $85 from Amazon (product number CMSO8GX3M2A1333C9). There really is absolutely no need to go with RAM that is anything but "standard" with a MBP. You don't need RAM that has the fancy metal enclosures, you don't need desktop gaming RAM, and so on. In fact, Kingston HyperX RAM is desktop DDR2 gaming RAM. That is overkill for ANY MBP on the market let alone the 13" model (that and it is the wrong type of RAM as it physically wouldn't fit in the notebook).

The 13" MBP has a SATA III (6Gbps) port for the primary hard drive. It will also work with a SATA II drive. Your limitations for SSD only depend on your price. I would have no hesitations going with an older SATA II SSD drive simply because SSD drives, even the SATA III ones, aren't limited by their connection type. SATA II still has more than enough bandwidth to handle the fastest notebook SSD drive on the market.

The only real constraint is going to be physical size. You need to get an SSD drive that is 2.5" and less than 10 mm thick. I believe most, if not all notebook SSD drives are like this.

 

Is the stock HD in MBPs (the 2011 models) have normal SATA drives in them or are they faster?

I watched a youtube video comparing 2 - 13" MBPs, one with SSD, the other with stock HD. The SSD was barely any faster. I hear that SSD doesnt benefit as well in MBP as compared to PC laptop is that true?

Cause if the max performance of SSD is limited in MBP id rather just sell it and use the stock HD.

For Ram, the apple site says the 13" uses DDR3 PC310600 ram. Wont any DDR3 PC310600 notebook ram work? Why do you have to use the standard ram?

http://www.memoryexpress.com/Products/PID-MX31137(ME).aspx

Will that work?

 

You've been somewhat mis-lead by kornchild.

Let me clarify a few things, the Ram just has to be DDR3 PC310600 notebook ram, but some RAM is apple certified for compatibility, it would be best to go with that, but its up to you.

As far as the SSD goes, since your MBP does use SATA III 6 GBPS like kornchild points out, there are SSD's that utilize the extra bandwidth beyond what SATA II can deliver.

The fastest SSD you can use are the OCZ vertex 3's and the new intel series, as I'm sure others as well.

You can also use any SATA II SSD you wish, just with a lower speed. The question about SSD's benefiting a windows machine more than an apple I'm not sure about, but SSD's come with all kinds of controllers and speed ratings, what SSD was used in the video you are talking about?

Also, check to see what SSD you are going to use works for others in their MBP's, there might be some quirkiness with the new SATA III SSD's that are just now hitting the shelves

 

I didn't mislead anyone. However, they could have misunderstood me. I was simply pointing out that there is no need to go with fancy RAM along the same lines that the OP pointed out (though for notebooks, not desktops). Standard RAM (as in RAM without any type of metal housing) will work just fine with any MBP and it is likely best due to space constraints.

Additionally, there still isn't any notebook SSD drive out there that fully takes advantage of SATA III (6Gbps-768MB/s) and I haven't come across a single model that currently uses SATA II's bandwidth (3Gbps-384MB/s) under continuous load. Intel's new SSD models are rated (by Intel) at 450 MB/s for read speeds but tests put it at around 350 MB/s for real world peak performance. The main issue is that manufacturers are slowing down their SSD drives when they use SATA II over SATA III. Intel locks their 510 drives down to 240 MB/s when using SATA II whereas SATA III goes about 100 MB/s higher (again, real world numbers and not Intel's).

Performance should be a lot higher when it comes to loading programs and booting Mac OS with even a lowly 150 MB/s SSD drive. If I remember correctly, the density of a standard 320-500GB 5400 RPM hard drive (density having a larger affect on data bandwidth than speed) allows for peak data transfer speeds of around 80 MB/s.

The main issue with SSD drives and Mac OS X now is that it sees them as standard hard drives. OS X Lion is going to change that by adding in trim support which will allow the MBP to actually determine which individual memory chips are full or empty instead of just writing data across multiple chips and now knowing which ones are completely full or empty. I don't believe trim support increases performance much but it has an affect on SSD drive longevity.

Also know that OS X is not compatible with every SSD drive out there. I believe it has issues with the new Intel models (which will likely be fixed with an update from Apple) in that it either doesn't see them at all or performance takes a hit. The type of SSD drive also greatly depends on the performance. Not every SSD drive is created equally. Certain brands perform differently as a new 120GB SSD drive from Crucial might be rated at 350 MB/s while one from OCZ might be rated for 320 MB/s. There are also some pretty bad models out there.

The best thing anyone can do when researching SSD drives is look at a website such as Tomshardware where they actually look at real world performance. I think they use Windows 7 at this moment so things will be a little different under Snow Leopard. They should both be about the same when Lion comes out.

 

Many users have experienced issues with the Intel 510 and 2011 MBP's in OSX. Also it may not just be the Intel 510, but other Sata III SSD's as well like the C300 and C400.

I have the Intel 510 and in OSX I've had lots of slow downs and endless loading beach ball cursors. In Win 7 (bootcamp) I haven't had any issues. I have a 256GB C400 and I may try it out for myself.

Apple - Support - Discussions - MBP 2011 and Intel SSD 510 ...

For ram any DDR3 1333Mhz Sodimm should be fine. I basically just bought the cheapest 2x4GB kit off Newegg. It the mushkin kit for like $70 AR.

 

Wouldn't sequential speed be continuous load? You can transfer files from one harddrive to another and you could see constant high transfer speeds. So newer drives with 500-550 MB/s sequential speeds could be limited by Sata 2. As far as random performance sure you probably won't need anymore than Sata 2.

 

I have the 17in MBP and I got the Kingston 2x4gb from Newegg for 65 with a rebate and the Kingston V+ 100 128gb SSD for 228.00 with a rebate. I chose this SSD because it has built in garbage collection and uses the same controller as the Apple SSD's.

 

im so pissed off right now. Ive been trying for the past hour to find out what screw driver is for my MBP. None the torx drivers work. the closest that will fit is the 000 one but thats still too big and it was starting to strip one screw so i stopped using it.

im gonna have to refund this torx set now and i wont bother putting 8gb ram or ssd in my MBP. Screw it. ill keep it stock. Another reason why im not gonna bother putting my intel x25m in my MBP is cause if i ever have to send my MBP in for service, i dont wanna have to deal with popping the HD out and putting in my stock one. Screw it. ill just sell the SSD.

im going to refund the two 4GB ram sticks tomrw.

 

Wow thanks guys for all the responses. My thread may seem a little noob, that was because it was late and I just wanted to get some information quickly. I my last laptop was an alienware but I decided I got sick of carrying my power brick and decided that I'm going to buy a computer and have this awesome macbook pro by my side for everyday use.

Now from what I've heard there hasn't been too many DIY upgrades just yet. I think its right to say that OS x at the moment does not support all SSD's so I think I can wait at least a month when they have WWDC to announce the final date of Lion (Which is meant to be soon, rumors of gold master have been said to ready for release or have been I don't really know.) However I'm really pleased that this beast has SATA III so when the time comes I can use that extra bandwidth.

As for the RAM I'll check what the computer can support I'm not to sure about the RAM having to be Apple certified, Ill check that up to. With the Hyper X being Desktop ram you can by it for notebooks.

 

you don't need any Torx just to swap RAM... theres like 1 holding down the hard drive, but you have to get the bottom off first.

 

That should be true. However, I think the fastest manufacturer rated notebook SSD drive is at around 450 MB/s but real world performance is much less than that. I believe Intel's 510 SSD line is currently the highest manufacturer rated SSD drive for notebooks and it would be limited SATA II's bandwidth but real world performance has been much less than what Intel is advertising. Then again, manufacturers are throttling their SATA III SSD drives down when using a SATA II connection. That is the real issue.

Helpmyfriend, I am not sure why you required a Torx driver to remove the 10 screws on the bottom of your MBP. I was able to upgrade my system to 8GB of RAM in all of 5 minutes using a standard screwdriver (Phillip's Head size 00). It is only a few dollars and that is all you need for upgrading the system's RAM and even swapping out the hard drive. In fact, the Torx bits wont' even work with PH screws. So don't get mad at the product and get frustrated because you are using the wrong tools. That would be like me getting mad at my Civic because I used a sledgehammer to try to open the door instead of the actual key.

 

Yeah from what I can see its a simple Phillips head but maybe they are different in different parts of the world.

 

As I mentioned already i have a 00 and its too big.

 

A Phillip's Head 00? No, it is not too big. That IS the size of the outer screws on all current MBP models. I can go buy ANY Phillip's Head 00 screwdriver and it would work, period. That is the whole point behind having a standard set of sizes that manufacturers (both of screws and screwdrivers).

 

Korn i went to home depot this morning and tried their 00 screwdriver. It fit. I compared it side by side to the one i bought yesterday and the ridges go down all the way to the end to grip the screw - the one yesterday doesnt, its a cheap crap on. And yes it was a 00 cause it even had it written on the driver itself.

So i got the one at home depot and returned the one yesterday. Thats a first that ive seen a screwdriver not fit when its the right size.

 

Alright guys going off topic thanks. Was wondering if adding an SSD or more RAM will draw more power causing less battery.

 

No. In fact, SSD's initial claim to fame (aside from having faster read speeds) was that it would consume less power than a typical hard drive but that turned out to be pretty much crap. Additionally, all 2011 MBP's come with two 2GB sticks of RAM anyway and a 4GB stick consumes just as much power as a 2GB stick (if I remember my EE correctly). Going from two 2GB stick of RAM to two 4GB sticks is going to have no affect on the battery life.

In fact, I am still getting over 7 hours per charge (when I play my cards right) with 8GB of RAM and a 7200 RPM hard drive.

 

Well thats a welcomed relief. I want to install parral just to run some indie games when i'm out 'Minecraft' So having 4GB to OSX and 4GB to Windows should hopefully improve stability at least.

I'm still concerned about the SSD compatibility if its really true that Lion will enable its own trimming and what not.

 

Yes, Lion will add Trim support. You can download the developer preview now, install it on an SSD drive, and see that it has Trim implementation. SSD compatibility shouldn't be an issue under Lion especially since the newer drives (and the majority of ones released last year) will all work under it. In fact, if anything, SSD compatibility will increase under Lion as people are currently having issues with Intel's latest SSD drives with Snow Leopard and Lion should (that being a keyword) fix that with updated drivers.

You can always go with a non-Intel model if you are worried about compatibility. In fact, I would recommend that simply because they seem to have better real world performance than the current releases from Intel (which miss their estimates by quite a bit).

 

Its not just the Intel Sata 3 ssd's that are having problems. The C300 and C400 also seem to have the same issues. It could very well be an issue with all Sata 3 ssd's.

 

Most, but not all. There are several SSD drives that pass the 250MB/sec barrier of SATAII. C400, Vertex 3 are pricey though.

But here's the thing about speed. If you're already really, really fast, then a 50% increase in speed isn't going to feel like a difference at all. So you'll notice a jump between HDD to SSD, but not between SSD SATA II and III. So, in essence, it's probably better to go with more space vs. speed.

 

Aren't SSDs with storage to spare still very expensive? I have seen them run into the hundreds.

Wouldn't a hybrid drive be a better option?

 

SSDs are still very expensive on a price/GB comparison. A 120/128GB model will easily go for $200-$450 depending on the drive. 256GB+ drives cost as much as a mid level Windows desktop all together ($600-$800) with some even going up to the $1000 level. The point of SSD is not to store everything though. They are mainly made for storing installed software and the operating system to allow for extremely fast boot and load times. Hybrid drives are more for people who want to load content a little faster than standard hard drives while not really compromising on storage space. SSD still has a ways to go before it can become something that the common consumer can afford in a large capacity. There was a time when a 16GB SSD drive was $400 and now that will get you much more.

Personally, I think hybrid hard drives have yet to prove themselves especially since there still hasn't been any wide industry adoption. I have also yet to read anything that has made hybrid drives all that compelling over the SSD+hard drive combination that many people are now using with notebooks. Additionally, with the price decreases in SSD and the (as of late) slow development of hard drive capacities in the 2.5" 9mm size, I wouldn't be surprised if hybrid drives become extinct in a few years.

 

Yes I think people are right it sucks that you have to rip out your dvd drive and pay for the adaptor to have 2 hard drives. These days i think all laptops should make room for 2. From what everyone is saying I think I might stick to buying a reasonable SATA II SSD

 

And what would you like to sacrifice for room for two harddrives?
Size/weight, optical drive, dedicated graphics card, computing power, battery life?

 

The most important factors that people perceive the speed of a SSD to be comes from the access time and random writes. Access times between most SSDs are almost identical and are several orders of magnitude faster than any HDD. Random writes still have yet to saturate SATA/150, so even though sequential speeds are marketed as being near SATA/600 levels, they rarely have much significance in most users usage pattern. Pretty much all the top SSDs will be around the same (even if for example, Intel's 320 series has relatively lower sequential speeds).

 

Those are good points. Most of the "feel fast" will be gone, though. It's one hell of a difference going from 0.5 MB/sec to 13 MB/sec as opposed to 13 MB/sec to 26 MB/sec. The former is 26x. The latter is only 2x.

 

I'd in the end sacrifice an optical drive, but I'm touchy because the uni body design has that cut out and it would feel weird not have it. The new 13" don't have discrete GPU wonder if they could of made room for a second caddy. But you have to agree that it seems to be a wise idea.

The real reason for my choice to get an SSD is boot times and loading applications so I might sacrifice my DVD drive and place a storage drive I'm not sure yet.

I think now I just need to know what SSD's are compatible atm or If i should just wait a month.

 

The 13" never had discrete GPU. It has always been a two chip solution (CPU + Motherboard Chipset). The Nvidia 320M from the 2010 MBP 13 is a Integrated Graphics Processor that was integrated into the motherboard chipset. The Nvidia GT320M is a discrete graphics processor.

As for SSD's you could get a Sata 2 one now and most likely be safe. Wait a month if your set on Sata III.

 

I would actually wait until OS X Lion comes out before going with a SATA III SSD simply because people have been reporting hit or miss performance with pretty much every SATA III option out there now. That and OS X Lion adds trim support meaning that it actually knows it is using an SSD drive so performance and SSD lifespan will both increase. Right now, OS X Snow Leopard treats SSD drives just like hard drives. OS X Lion may (and it should) bring driver updates that solve current issues people are having with SATA III SSDs.

 

My mistake I just realized that now. First time I even looked at Mac's 2 weeks ago .

Agreed I think Ill just wait, I've taken out my old 7200 RPM drive from my old laptop and swapped it out.

If you ordered a Mac with an SSD option does it still only recognize it as a HHD? Thats kinda sloppy of apple not to have at least updated it now rather than provide a whole OS with a minor fix.

 

I'm not sure what you mean here? An ssd is suppose to be recognized as a hard drive? The SSD's that come with Macs are the only ones to officially support trim right now without any hacks. The down side of the ones that come with Macs are they aren't the fastest and in some cases aren't the cheapest.