I'm thinking about updating a bit my Macbook Pro mid 2010 adding to it 8Gb of RAM and maybe a new hard drive, a solid one (SSD) of probably 240Gb.

Which SSD would you recommend me? I'm looking for one compatible with TRIM because as far as I know that's the best way to go in order to keep the performance of the SSD after some time. I've also checked some performances reviews and it seems there's a big difference between some of them. (or there was, as the article is from 2010)

I was checking the models Apple used in its days for the firsts Macbook Pro with SSD, but I believe there are better options now in the market.

Is it relevant that my laptop is from 2010? Should I take that into account for something?

I believe I shouldn't experiment any problem with this change of hard drive and will improve the laptop performance as well as the hard drive life. Am I wrong?
I'm afraid of the possibility of having problems with it for compatibility issues or any other thing.


  • 3
    Visit: anandtech.com/show/7545/best-ssds-holiday-2013 for details on recommended (modern) SSDs from a trusted source. Questions regarding non-Apple hardware are not supported on AskDifferent (please consult the about page for more details: apple.stackexchange.com/about). With that said, you should focus your search on the best SSD as it is irrelevant what you plug them in to in terms of computers (PCs, Macs). The only bottleneck you'll experience is in the SATA transfer speeds (3Gbps for your MBP).
    – user10355
    Commented Jan 10, 2014 at 10:36
  • @cksum it seems it is not that irrelevant if its for a Mac computer or not. In this comparison in Apple discussions they point out that Crucial M500 has a better controller for Apple computers than Samsung 840 (which is faster). Therefore, they all end up recommending Crucial M500.
    – Steve
    Commented Jan 14, 2014 at 10:20
  • I don't see anywhere they claim that Crucial's controller is better than Samsung's, especially in regards to Apple computers. Only thing I see is someone making those claims. Not a lick of proof. Samsung has been making solid state storage modules almost exclusively for Apple computers since the MBA was announced. If your company works closely as a direct supplier with Apple, you'd think you'd take what you learnt and apply it across your entire product line. Crucial has never had such a lucrative contract. Apple's legal battles with Samsung are irrelevant. The M500 and 840 are both great.
    – user10355
    Commented Jan 14, 2014 at 12:01

2 Answers 2


I recommend the Crucial M500 SSDs. They're solid, reliable, and fast. I've replaced the OEM HDD on both my 2008 aluminum MacBook and 2011 MacBook Pro with them and have had 0 issues so far, they work great. Below are some links for your perusal.

Buy them on Amazon

Manufacturer Information

  • Some other people is recommending me the Samsung 840.Here's a comparison: ssd.userbenchmark.com/Compare/…
    – Steve
    Commented Jan 13, 2014 at 14:39
  • I can only honestly recommend what I've used and can vouch for :) Crucial has also been in the SSD/memory business/market longer than Samsung has, btw.
    – MisterMike
    Commented Jan 13, 2014 at 17:15
  • you are right. I also checked it in an Apple discussions topic and it seems the controllers of the Crucial M500 are much better for a Mac computer.
    – Steve
    Commented Jan 14, 2014 at 10:18

I put an Intel 330 series SSD in my mid-2010 MBP. The performance difference (compared to stock 500GB HDD) was amazing.

It worked for me, and it's TRIM compatible but you need to use TRIM Enabler or similar to turn it on.

Personally I looked around for info on the most reliable SSDs rather than the fastest. I found people saying they'd successfully used the Intels (and well most brands actually). I also found some vendors saying that (at the time) the Intel 330s were seeing less RAs than some other similarly priced brands I was looking at; this may or may not be the case right now, and I was only able to compare a few brands. For me, the top-end drive speed difference didn't mean all that much, because primarily I was after the low seek speeds.

Sure it was nice having ~400MB/s+ (not sure what speed it actually ran at) but I didn't do a lot of work that truly utilised the top-speed of the SSD, so the performance differences were pretty moot. And unless you're doing some heavy video editing or really disk-heavy work, I'd suggest the performance differences won't be noticed.

One final point, if using a data-doubler or similar (i.e. replacing the DVD drive with a second disk) bear in mind that the two SATA ports are of different speeds in the mid-2010 MBP. The primary (HDD) SATA port is SATA3 (6Gbps ~ 700 MB/sec ish) while the secondary (optical drive's) port is SATA2 (3Gbps ~ 350MB/sec ish) so you definitely want to put any SSD in the primary SATA port where the main HDD is/was.

  • Thanks for the answer! I was also reading that SSD drives are less prone to failure than HDDs so I guess any SSD I install will be superior in this aspect than my old HDD. Why were you so centered in the reliable aspect?
    – Steve
    Commented Jan 13, 2014 at 14:44
  • As far as I'm aware, yes, SSDs are much more reliable than HDDs in general, so it's a big step up either way. The reliability aspect was because after rejecting options that were over-budget or too hard to get hold of, I needed some way of comparing them to make a choice. Performance differences between them didn't make much difference to me (like most people, I don't regularly spend long periods at peak SSD throughput; the extra 10% of one drive over another would be unnoticeable). Commented Jan 14, 2014 at 0:47
  • thanks or the info. After seeing this discussion on Apple forum I believe I will end up buying the Crucial M500 which although its slower than Samsung 840, its controllers seems to work much better for Mac and won't cause much troubles.
    – Steve
    Commented Jan 14, 2014 at 10:22

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .