or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Current Mac Hardware › MacBook Air face-off: HDD vs SSD (with video)
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

MacBook Air face-off: HDD vs SSD (with video)

post #1 of 29
Thread Starter 
In this fourth installment of our MacBook Air review series, we pit Apple's standard hard disk drive (HDD) model against the standard solid state drive (SSD) configuration in a set of battery and benchmark tests to gauge the performance and power saving capabilities of each. Videos are used to demonstrate a side-by-side simultaneous boot, as well some application launch tests.

Most critics of the MacBook Air have largely focused on what it doesn't have in comparison to the full size MacBook and high end MacBook Pro. This sounds a lot like complaining that a convertible lacks seats for six adults and the cargo room of a minivan. What's more interesting about the Air is how well it serves the purpose it was intended to achieve: a light, thin, and highly mobile laptop.

The previous two segments looked at issues faced by early adopters. Early adopter issues: MacBook Air and Migration Assistant examined the problems related to using only its built in WIFI 802.11n wireless networking to import files and users from another computer. In initial testing, it looked like the problem was the speed limitations of WiFi, but our followup testing suggests that WiFi can be very competitive for installing software.

In addition to the customary features Apple pared away from the Air to make it lighter, thinner, and less expensive, the new laptop also offers a new option: a solid state drive. It's not cheap, but it is fast and promises to be more reliable than a physical hard drive mechanism. SSDs use high density Flash RAM chips to store data in place of a conventional HDD's magnetically read platters.

The New SSD: More Expensive, Less Storage

Solid state drives are expensive, but costs are coming down. Of course, there's still a long way for their price tags to go. A 1.8" 64 GB SSD costs around $1600 at retail and 128GB versions are $3000 and up. The only thing that will force these prices down is the economies of scale from widespread adoption. A number of specialized ultra mobile laptops began offering an SSD option over the last six months, but Apple's more mainstream offering in the MacBook Air presents high capacity SSDs to a wide new audience. The One Laptop Per Child XO and Asus Eee PC also use SSD, but in much smaller sizes ranging from 1GB on the XO and between 2 and 8GB SSDs on the Eee PC.

An SSD is more than just Flash RAM chips; it also includes an ATA interface so the memory chips appear to the computer just like a hard drive. The iPhone and Flash iPods use Flash RAM, but not packaged in an SSD nor using an ATA interface. The SSD is designed as a package to be functionally identical to a standard hard drive and act as a drop-in replacement. That means Air users who opt for the standard HDD will be able to upgrade themselves to an SSD in the future using an off the shelf SSD that will likely be both larger and cheaper than what is available today. The high cost of SSD effectively limits its practical use to ultra mobile laptops and other specialty devices, where its advantages in speed, power savings, and reliability can offset its current price and capacity limitations.

Upgrading from the Air's standard 80GB HDD to a 64GB SSD costs a steep $999. The biggest downside after cost is the drop in capacity. Formatted, the 64GB SSD has a capacity of 55.6GB. With the default software install, its ships with around 38 GB available. As Bare Feats notes, "If we reserve 8GB for Virtual Memory, that only leaves us 30GB for documents, tunes, movies, photos, and third party apps." Users who need more than that will have to stick with the standard conventional hard drive. In comparison, the 80GB HDD supplies 74.5GB formatted capacity, and with the pre-installed software offers roughly 55GB available to the user.



SSD Speed Advantage

Fortunately, the SSD offers some advantages as well; the most obvious is speed. Flash RAM data writing usually isn't actually faster than a conventional hard drive; in sequential write tests the SSD was only 60-80% as fast. However, in disk reading and particularly random access reads, the SSD was dramatically faster: as much as 18 times faster.



That means faster booting, faster application launching, and faster open file operations, all tasks where the user is likely be waiting for disk access to finish. Write speeds during file saving have less of an impact on usability. In general file operations and copying, the weakness of SSD to write is well overshadowed by its blazing ability to read and its special prowess at randomly reading information on disk. A mechanical HDD has to physically move its head across the disk to perform random access operations.

SSD read speeds won't make the overall system dramatically faster all the time, but they are noticeable any time a lot of data is being read. Boot times were consistently much faster. As the video (below) demonstrates, the SSD was able to finish booting and connect to a wireless network while the HDD model was still spinning its gear on the grey boot screen.



We also selected 17 applications to simultaneously launch (excluding any that obscure the display such as Front Row). The SSD was able to rapidly load all of them at once, while the HDD struggled to manage so much concurrent disk activity. By the time it had finished, the SSD model had already put the display to sleep (below).



However, the speed launch trick is only impressive at the first launch of an application after a reboot. Mac OS X aggressively caches data to allow the slower HDD launch its applications nearly as fast on a second try (below).



As Flash prices drop, the performance advantage of SSD will begin to outweigh the cost, and current capacity limitations promise to be less of a factor as well. That will allow Apple to focus its Mac OS X development efforts on optimal SSD reading and cached writing, rather than catering its optimizations to the nature of standard hard drives with longer latency and seek times.

On page 2 of 2: Power Savings; Reliability; and Worth the Grand?

Power Savings

The MacBook Air's fixed battery and 3-5 hours of runtime make any opportunity to save power a critical feature. Users can't expect the SSD option to make a huge impact on how long they can use the Air on a charge though. The biggest power savings impact isn't directly observed in battery use, but rather shows up again in terms of performance.

Savvy laptop users know several tricks to get the most life span from their machine: drop the display brightness, turn off unnecessary radios, allow the unit to sleep, and let the hard drive spin down when not in use. The advantage of an SSD is that it doesn't need to spin down. A conventional HDD is kept spinning at all times in order to be responsive. When the Energy Saver System Preference is set to "put hard drives to sleep when possible," the system will spin it down, reducing the power drain but making things awkwardly pause every time the disk is accessed due to the time needed to spin the drive up to speed.

The SSD is not only never spinning, it's also never needing to spin up, meaning no irritating pause when files are opened or applications are launched. This also makes a significant impact on boot times, as the HDD has to initially spin up from a cold stop while the SSD is ready to rock from the moment power hits it. It also means the SSD has all the performance of a spinning HDD without needing to scrape at performance with disk sleep.

In order to accurately test the Air's battery life, it needs to be cycled multiple times to achieve its full capacity. We pulled a full MPEG-2 DVD image over WiFi more than once over a three hour period before we could exhaust the thin strip of Lithium Polymer that powers the Air. In more conventional use involving web browsing and writing, using WiFi with power management settings on Better Energy Savings and the screen dimmed to half brightness, we managed to pull a full five hours and ten minutes of use from the HDD Air, and fifteen minutes less time from SSD Air doing similar but not identical work.

The SSD we tested also had a faster processor, which may have ate into its battery life slightly faster, but it was also a week newer, so it didn't have time to cycle through as many battery recharges. Charging the battery took longer than depleting it, as long as 8 hours with the included power adapter or 5 hours using a MacBook Pro adapter. Other reviewers were unable to get the full rating from the Air's battery because in many cases, they purposely defeated the battery saving technology used to coax time from the battery and ran looping MP3 playback rather than actually using the laptop as a laptop.

The MacBook Air certainly makes a poor $1799 iPod and shouldn't be recommended for that purpose. Our mix of using Safari, iChat, TextEdit, and Dictionary to do actual work regularly accessed the wireless networking and disk, as TextEdit auto-saved the documents we worked on and spun up the drive at regular intervals in order to do this. Bluetooth was turned off.

Reliability

SSD is also able to withstand extreme shock, high altitude, vibration, and temperature extremes better than a conventional hard drive. This impacts overall reliability, expected life span, and the general fragility of the system. One of the first components of a laptop to die is its hard drive, due to the complex moving parts, intense heat, and mechanical wear that it has to withstand. An SSD has none of these reasons to wear out or fail, making it as reliable as the logic board or any other solid state components. Another side effect of being solid state is that the SSD is also completely silent.

How much more reliable is the SSD over a conventional HDD? That would be pretty impossibly difficult to benchmark accurately. In defense of the Air's HDD, reader Rick Hyman noted that our review of the MacBook Air "seems to infer the 1.8 inch HD used in the MBA has the same failure modes as the 1.8 in HDs used in iPods. This is not true. The MBA appears to use a new 1.8 in HD announced by Toshiba in December. This new HD is more rugged and can handle more robust use than the older HDs. Certainly, this new 1.8 in HD was a necessity for Apple, since no laptop could be reasonable expected to use the type of HDs used in iPods. The slower speeds of the 1.8 in HD remain as an issue."

The first batch of Airs are using Samsung HS0822HB 1.8" HDD components. On its website, Samsung lists the target applications of this model as "camcorders, MP3 players, navigators, personal media players, UMPC," but not laptops. That's likely because no PC maker has built a full size 13.3" laptop that is ultra thin like the Air, and therefore most laptops use 2.5" mechanisms instead. The Air's SSD is listed as MCCOE64GEMPP, and is also made by Samsung. That company has long been the supplier of lots of Apple's Flash RAM, SDRAM, and hard drives, although not an exclusive source for any of those components. New batches of Airs will likely use other parts.

Worth the Grand?

While new 1.8" HDD used in the Air would certainly seem to need to be in a higher duty class than those used in the iPods, it's still a tiny mechanism and hasn't been proven in long term use. This newness may push more users to consider the expensive but faster and more reliable SSD option despite its much higher cost and limited storage capacity. SSD is new too, but there's nothing unknown about how memory chips wear out.

For users to whom cost is not a big deal, the SSD option paired with the processor upgrade delivers the fastest possible experience, with significantly faster booting, application launching, and shutdown, and with no spin up lag even when working from the battery in power saving mode. Everyone else will need to weigh their needs for delicious luxury with more practical considerations such as storage capacity and budget.

Users buying the Air because it looks great probably won't see any reason to spring for the more expensive version, but business users attracted to its full sized mobility will find a lot to like about the SSD, which makes it both that much more-full sized in terms of speed and more mobile in terms of spin-free reliability.

AppleInsider's MacBook Air review series

For more on AppleInsider's ongoing in-depth look at the MacBook Air, check out these earlier installments:

MacBook Air (HDD model): an in-depth review

Early adopter issues: MacBook Air and Migration Assistant

Early adopter issues: MacBook Air, SuperDrive, Remote Disc and Install

MacBook Air spawns new software solutions for missing hardware

How the MacBook Air stacks up against other ultra-light notebooks
post #2 of 29
The table for the random read / writes appears to be the wrong way round with the SDD drive taking longer than the HDD?
post #3 of 29
Quote:
Originally Posted by parky View Post

The table for the random read / writes appears to be the wrong way round with the SDD drive taking longer than the HDD?

It's MB/s and not time taken

Oh and SSDs are slower at writing I believe for some reason
Windows Development Team Motto: We are not happy until YOU are not happy
Reply
Windows Development Team Motto: We are not happy until YOU are not happy
Reply
post #4 of 29
But is there a measurable difference in heat between the two models? MBA heat is the most concerning topic to me of them all.
post #5 of 29
It appears that there's a few errors in the article. I think the right column head should read "SDD compared to HD", and not "% faster". SSD are actually slower than HDs at writing, and not 18% faster.
Consequently, the text needs to be corrected, too: SSD do not seem to be 18 times "faster", but 18 times as fast.
post #6 of 29
Quote:
Originally Posted by KamiNoYadoru View Post

But is there a measurable difference in heat between the two models? MBA heat is the most concerning topic to me of them all.

Not directly answering your question, but just as an fyi, the MBA heats far less than the MBP - the latter is close to scalding, on the lap. I could barely feel the heat from the MBA.

However, I did hear a dull fan-like noise a couple of times (couldn't tell if it was a fan or just the noise of the HD spinning) - does it have a fan?
post #7 of 29
I've been using the 1.8/64 GB version of the MBA on the road for the past week.
Perhaps the best laptop of many I've used (PB 12, Thinkpad X41, Sony TX650) while traveling for business or pleasure. Boot time of 15-20 seconds to log in screen, near instant startup of applications, easy connectivity to LCD and open WAP and smooth remote desktop top connections.
I carry most work files on a USB thumbdrive or carry a small USB disk drive for photos, music, movies etc.
Best of all, very light weight and easy to use on the road (including coach class seats).

Great review, but don't get too hung up on the numbers, this laptop does what it was meant to do.
post #8 of 29
Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post

Not directly answering your question, but just as an fyi, the MBA heats far less than the MBP - the latter is close to scalding, on the lap. I could barely feel the heat from the MBA.

However, I did hear a dull fan-like noise a couple of times (couldn't tell if it was a fan or just the noise of the HD spinning) - does it have a fan?

On the SSD version, I have yet to hear the fan through a week of near constant use.
post #9 of 29
Quote:
Originally Posted by Monkeyoe View Post

It's MB/s and not time taken

Oh and SSDs are slower at writing I believe for some reason

Perhaps this article will help, "Understanding Flash SSD Performance" at http://www.storagesearch.com/easyco-...rmance-art.pdf

www.storagesearch.com pretty good reference site.
post #10 of 29
Quote:
Originally Posted by LichMBA View Post

On the SSD version, I have yet to hear the fan through a week of near constant use.


I haven't heard the fan on my HDD Air version after a week, either.
Follow me on Twitter.
Reply
Follow me on Twitter.
Reply
post #11 of 29
Double the storage and half the price and i'm in.
[CENTER]Diana Rein
Putting the Soul back into Rock 'n Roll
[/CENTER]

[CENTER]"The Back Room"

Diana Rein Available on iTunes for $8[/CENTER]
Reply
[CENTER]Diana Rein
Putting the Soul back into Rock 'n Roll
[/CENTER]

[CENTER]"The Back Room"

Diana Rein Available on iTunes for $8[/CENTER]
Reply
post #12 of 29
It may not matter whether the HDD used is the same as the one used in the iPod or not. Susceptibility to failure from shock would be very different based on the enclosure that the HDD is in. I.E. a HDD in a iPod is more likely to receive more frequent and higher g shocks than the same HDD in a MBA.
post #13 of 29
Has anyone run a benchmark with one of the cores disabled to see if that affects maximum battery time under normal usage?
post #14 of 29
Quote:
Originally Posted by davidswelt View Post

Consequently, the text needs to be corrected, too: SSD do not seem to be 18 times "faster", but 18 times as fast.

You REEAALLLY need to get out more.
post #15 of 29
Follow me on Twitter.
Reply
Follow me on Twitter.
Reply
post #16 of 29
Quote:
Originally Posted by MiMiC View Post

Double the storage and half the price and i'm in.

Sure, you'll also grow younger waiting for that to happen, so be patient.
post #17 of 29
Flash is much faster than disk for reading and writing, but the flash controller in the SSD was probably engineered for low cost and modularity rather than high performance. A performance-oriented, 8 chip flash unit should be pulling upwards of 100MB/s for sustained write, and yet faster read. This has been done for some industrial applications, but the market for commodity-packaged SSD units hasn't really grown to the point where we can expect competition to drive manufacturers to adopt performance-oriented product strategies.
Cat: the other white meat
Reply
Cat: the other white meat
Reply
post #18 of 29
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post

An SSD is more than just Flash RAM chips; it also includes an ATA interface so the memory chips appear to the computer just like a hard drive. The iPhone and Flash iPods use Flash RAM, but not packaged in an SSD nor using an ATA interface. The SSD is designed as a package to be functionally identical to a standard hard drive and act as a drop-in replacement.

Anyone know the significance of this?

I mean - if I'm a computer manufacturer and want to use flash RAM chips instead of a hard disk, why is it important that those flash RAM chips are packaged so they look exactly like a hard disk?

My USB flash drives don't pretend to be an ATA hard disk... but the operating system makes them look like that for me and my applications... right?

Quote:
Users buying the Air because it looks great probably won't see any reason to spring for the more expensive version, but business users attracted to its full sized mobility will find a lot to like about the SSD

With the price of SSD coming down so rapidly, I assume that if we bought a HDD version today we could pay $1000 in a years time to upgrade to an even faster 128GB SSD.
post #19 of 29
Quote:
Originally Posted by Splinemodel View Post

Flash is much faster than disk for reading and writing.

I think it also depends on the speed grade of the flash chips themselves.
post #20 of 29
Quote:
Originally Posted by GregAlexander View Post

Anyone know the significance of this?

I mean - if I'm a computer manufacturer and want to use flash RAM chips instead of a hard disk, why is it important that those flash RAM chips are packaged so they look exactly like a hard disk?

My USB flash drives don't pretend to be an ATA hard disk... but the operating system makes them look like that for me and my applications... right?

So that users can swap SSD Drives later. It will be pre-packaged just like a hard drive.
post #21 of 29
The article says that with the ATA interface the SSD drive looks like a regular ATA hard drive to the computer. Therefore, the article says, users will one day be able to drop an SSD drive in place of their old hard drive.

Unfortunately this is unlikely as the SSD drives seem to be coming out in SATA interface and Apple has chosen a PATA interface for the M.B.A. drives. So I will not likely be able to buy a new, high capacity SSD drive and replace my 80 Gb 4200 RPM M.B.A. drive. :-(

What I want to know is why Apple chose the out-of-date PATA interface over the more modern SATA. AppleInsider Crew, any ideas?

Joe
post #22 of 29
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheEdge View Post

What I want to know is why Apple chose the out-of-date PATA interface over the more modern SATA. AppleInsider Crew, any ideas?

It doesn't look like the 1.8" size drives are available in SATA yet.
post #23 of 29
The video of 17 apps launching at one time was very impressive. Wonder how a Windows ultraportable would fare on this test using Vista?
post #24 of 29
Quote:
Originally Posted by davidswelt
Consequently, the text needs to be corrected, too: SSD do not seem to be 18 times "faster", but 18 times as fast.

Quote:
Originally Posted by stonefree View Post

You REEAALLLY need to get out more.

Weighing in on the side of the nit-pickers, it's also "have eaten" not "have ate," one "in" should have been ' in" ' and "pretty impossibly difficult to" is a pretty stretched example of English syntax as long as we're being picayune (and there were other such opportunities).

One minor technical caveat: in addressing SSD reliability the topic of the smaller number of rewrites that SSD's are supposed to have or may have before failing was not addressed at all.

But overall, a really solid review.and another example of why Apple Insider's becoming my first Mac site visit of the day.

Especially since another leading site converted to a new look that's as cluttered as a bad MySpace page (as if there any other kind) and seems to be relying on the personalities of its long time pundits, while AI is publishing solid in-depth news, reviews, predictions and digging into the history of how we've gotten from there to here -- e.g., the recent series on the genesis of each of the Office suite components and their Apple counterparts. I really haven't seen its like anywhere. Oh, and that site views itself as too professional to engage in "rumor mongering," leaving out many juicy tidbits, and for some reason (why they would leave this out is curious to me) you also seem recently to have more press coverage of business, market analyst and general publication news of Apple, Inc.

You also have the best forum software of any Macophilic site. Love the multi-quote option in particular, having three options, numbering of the posts and a clean stark layout that emphasizes the content while eschewing distracting eye candy.
Otherwise, keep up the good work, but do devote a few more resources to proofreading and editing!!

An iPhone, a Leatherman and thou...  ...life is complete.

Reply

An iPhone, a Leatherman and thou...  ...life is complete.

Reply
post #25 of 29
Quote:
Originally Posted by Willy View Post

The video of 17 apps launching at one time was very impressive. Wonder how a Windows ultraportable would fare on this test using Vista?

Well, probably sooooooo much faster because a lot of Windows ultraportables have optical drives in them, which adds more power.
Follow me on Twitter.
Reply
Follow me on Twitter.
Reply
post #26 of 29
i had really wanted to love the SSD model, but honestly in real world computing, there isn't much between the two models beyond the $1000.

Yes, for heavily disk intensive reads, the SSD shines, but this isn't a computer that you are going to be loading multi-GB datasets from and the idea of loading 17 applications at once is just cockamamy. Loading an app at a time or a file at a time, the HDD is great and very very close to the SSD.

Equally, you could have designed write-intensive tests that would have made the HDD appear much faster. In fact, your claims that the SSD shuts down much faster is not really true in a real world situation. When there is a lot to write going into shutdown, the SSD crawls (I have made this happen on a demo machine) and takes as long to turn off as the MBA can to load from a cold boot.

The fact is that the SSD is still flawed technology. Once they get the writes down pat, it should be better, but people expecting a big bump in performance when word processing, surfing, working with spreadsheets and doing emails won't really find any difference subjectively.

Believe me, if there had been anything to pick between them, I would have bought an SSD. The fact is that in two hours of restarting, shutting down, cold booting, loading apps, loading and saving data, and generally doing the sorts of things that most of us do on a laptop, neither the .2Ghz nor the SSD gave me any reason to buy this new tech (and I love new tech). I honestly wish that it had. I'll pop in an SSD when their performance improves (the problems isn't the PATA), and they will no doubt continue to improve very rapidly.
post #27 of 29
Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffDM View Post

I think it also depends on the speed grade of the flash chips themselves.

The same is true for disks, but even low-end flash can yield very fast performance when 8+ chips are addressed in parallel.
Cat: the other white meat
Reply
Cat: the other white meat
Reply
post #28 of 29
I can understand that some people might want to get bogged down in numbers and comparing the MBA to other laptops but in all honesty, this laptop is amazing for it was designed to do. I have had it for a week now and it is very fast even with many applications open. It is just very snappy and I have the base model. If you think you would benefit from having a light laptop then you should definetely get it. It is definetely worth the $$$ in my opinion. Ok that's my opinion and I'm stickin with it
post #29 of 29
You mention in the battery tests that the SSD model has a more powerful processor than the hard disk version.

Why didn't you mention this in the first part when you're talking about hard drive performance.

Of course having a faster processor will contribute to faster load times, which makes your results, for all intents and purposes, a load of crap.

I understand you're trying to make SSD look better than it is because it's AppleInsider's modus operandi to make everything Apple does seem even better than it already is, but it would be nice if you'd be honest when you're doing benchmark tests that may influence somebody to spend $1000 more than they should....

Maybe that 40 seconds saved by the SSD with the faster processor would only be 20 or 10 seconds with the same processor, but I guess we won't know until a real news source comes out with some tests.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Current Mac Hardware
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Current Mac Hardware › MacBook Air face-off: HDD vs SSD (with video)