Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

SEkker · Jan 19, 2007, 08:03 PM

I cloned everything from the stock 100GB, 5400 rpm drive. This is an original revA MBP 2.0, purchased March, 2006. It has 2 GB RAM, running 10.4.8. No major system addons.

So far, so good - the machine seems to be working fine, the drive does not seem to be hot or noisy.

As I did this mostly because my older drive had well over 90 GB of stuff on it that I seem to not be able to live without, I thought this was the best method to go.

I'll continue to post, but first impressions seem good.

If you have any questions or want more info, let me know.

iREZ · Jan 19, 2007, 09:31 PM

how is the relative speed in comparison in disk heavy activity? is there any noticeable speed hits?

SEkker · Jan 20, 2007, 12:03 AM

So far, the most annoying effect is the repair -- somehow, when the Apple authorized reseller replaced the HD, they made the hinges no longer properly catch the lid when I shut the MBP.

wilsonng · Jan 20, 2007, 03:42 AM

well, how about boot time, loading applications, and saving large files like a QuickTime movie?

I'm just curious in the speed difference.

SEkker · Jan 20, 2007, 01:12 PM

I'm not sure I'll be able to do any better than barefeats:

MacBook Pro - various drives compared

[I don't have an esata card to do a direct comparison like they did.]

WaiGuo GuiZi · Jan 21, 2007, 01:07 AM

Originally Posted by SEkker

I'm not sure I'll be able to do any better than barefeats:

MacBook Pro - various drives compared

I'm about to buy a MBP 2.33GHz 17". I'm still wondering which hard drive I should buy in the original MBP to store a triple-boot system. I've read the article SEkker cited above. According to that article:

When little of the hard drive is full, the Hitachi 7200rpm 100GB HD runs as much as one-third faster than the Toshiba 4200rpm 200GB.
But when that Hitachi 100GB is 74% full, it runs slightly slower than the Toshiba 200GB.
Either of the 160GB 5400rpm drives would seem to be a good compromise until 148GB of it is full, at which point it underperforms the Toshiba 200GB

So the big question is, how much of the internal HD will I fill up?

On it I will put Parallels, OS X, some flavor of Linux, Windows XP Pro (& eventually Vista), Micro$oft Office, Thunderbird e-mail, and Firefox. I'll get some external Firewire 800 enclosure with a SATA HD to store all non-essential data. My primary uses will be systems development -- I'm a student studying for a BSc in computer science -- text editing, Web browsing, and mobile e-mail: no heavy video or audio apps.

This is really a hardware capacity question, not a software question. Suppose I want to keep the HD utilization below 50%. Which do you fellows think I should choose: 100GB 7200rpm? 160GB 5400rpm? or 200GB 4200rpm?

skyman · Jan 21, 2007, 12:30 PM

Originally Posted by SEkker

I cloned everything from the stock 100GB, 5400 rpm drive. This is an original revA MBP 2.0, purchased March, 2006. It has 2 GB RAM, running 10.4.8. No major system addons.

What external case did you purchase to do the cloning with?

glhart · Jan 21, 2007, 01:38 PM

I have a MBP 17 c2d with a 160 gig drive. I just got a LaCie extreme 500 (which has 2 disks raided together) and copied my 160 to it (using 800 firewire). When I boot from the LaCie, the machine is MUCH faster -- according to XBench the LaCie is twice as fast as the 160. Certainly makes the computer seem like a different machine. The point is, perhaps the biggest sacrifice one makes buying a portable is the hard drive -- it's a trade off between speed and being able to take your info everywhere. I don't think the speed difference between the 200 and the 160 is enough to make a difference for most people. But anyone would notice immediately the speed difference booting from the LaCie.

SEkker · Jan 21, 2007, 05:42 PM

Originally Posted by skyman

What external case did you purchase to do the cloning with?

I purchased this one from newegg.com

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16817145392

My only caution is that is said it works with drives up to 100 GB; I put the 200 GB drive into it and it seemed to work fine (i.e. the mac os recognized it as a 200 GB drive, and I was able to clone my 84 GB of stuff onto it).

There is a cheaper, OEM version now listed at newegg.

SEkker · Jan 21, 2007, 08:03 PM

UPDATE:

I had a very unusual experience. When I picked up the machine after having the hard drive replaced, the lid did not close well (it took extra oomph). I had them check it before I left the store, but they said 'nothing we did should have affected the lid.'

It also had problems sleeping when the lid closed, and the machine felt sluggish - something I thought was due to the slower hard drive.

Last night, I figured out the problem! They did not have the base case lined up quite right. I pushed and closed the gap (with a couple unnerving audible snaps!). Suddenly, the lid now closes properly, the machine goes to sleep (and wakes up great), and -- more importantly -- it is noticeably faster. Clearly there was a conflict somehow messing up the machine.

I can now give the hard drive replacement a full thumbs up. Now that I have 100GB free, I feel comfortable installing bootcamp and parallels so I can have a full windows-compliant machine.

pcguy1 · Jan 21, 2007, 10:28 PM

Can someone with Apple computer service background explain how a case that have the base plate not completely tight down can make the computer noticeably slower? this I don't understand at all

SEkker · Jan 21, 2007, 11:19 PM

Originally Posted by pcguy1

Can someone with Apple computer service background explain how a case that have the base plate not completely tight down can make the computer noticeably slower? this I don't understand at all

Keep in mind the issue was clearly linked to energy savings and related controls. The machine really did not want to properly go to sleep (even when I could get the machine latched). I twice picked up the machine and it was HOT over the weekend.

I agree that it is strange. I wonder if it explains some of the MBP overheating issues others are experiencing.

wubrew · Jan 26, 2007, 01:43 PM

Is there a GB limit to the HD upgrade in MBP?

mduell · Jan 26, 2007, 07:02 PM

Originally Posted by wubrew

Is there a GB limit to the HD upgrade in MBP?

There is, but it's so high that it won't prevent you from using any drive available today (or in the next few years).

wubrew · Jan 28, 2007, 01:13 AM

Thanks mduell. Next question: 2G PC5300 (667) in 1G slot? Total of 6G ram! And broke. Please don't bump me yet.

mduell · Jan 28, 2007, 09:10 PM

Originally Posted by wubrew

Thanks mduell. Next question: 2G PC5300 (667) in 1G slot? Total of 6G ram! And broke. Please don't bump me yet.

Wtf? The MBP can accept 2G+1G for a total of 3G. The chipset supports 4G, but you can only access 3.2G if you install 4, so Apple has just limited it to 3.

wubrew · Jan 29, 2007, 12:48 AM

Originally Posted by mduell

Wtf? The MBP can accept 2G+1G for a total of 3G. The chipset supports 4G, but you can only access 3.2G if you install 4, so Apple has just limited it to 3.

Just pushing my luck on pressing your knowlege button. Good show chap! Thanks for the info. Those 2G ram are running $600+ any way. I wonder what they are for?
http://www.oempcworld.com/Merchant2/...ode=PC2-SO5300