Samsung XP941 or SM951 in 2009 Mac Pro (5,1)?

Question

Samsung XP941 or SM951 in 2009 Mac Pro (5,1)?

Is it better to put Samsung XP941 or a Samsung SM951 in a 2009 Mac Pro firmware upgraded to 5,1? On paper, the SM951 is faster, but I have also heard that the on-board controller does not work well with the older Mac Pro towers, and, of course, this model tower could not take advantage of the new PCIe 3.0. I was actually thinking of installing a couple in RAID 0 with the goal of topping out above 2000 in a sequential read (my data is backed up all over the place). The XP941 is tried and true, but I had been waiting on the SM951, which promised even faster speeds. By the way, I know that, at these levels, I will not notice the difference except on benchmarks. It's a hobby.

🙂

Gina

Mac Pro, OS X Yosemite (10.10.2), 4,1 firmware-upgraded to 5,1

Posted on Apr 8, 2015 7:42 PM

Reply

Answer 1

Best reply

lllaass

Level 10

210,411 points

Apr 9, 2015 3:37 PM in response to LifeboatParty

Maybe this discussion will help

http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=1685821&page=21

Reply

Answer 2

The hatter

Level 9

60,990 points

Apr 9, 2015 3:37 PM in response to LifeboatParty

Faster is always relative. Random is ideal though for the system. Writes? used for scratch?

My experience is RAID0 may look good on paper, was used to get higher capacity volumes, but is not usually ideal for a system. However those that are using the Velocity Duo would also not be dissuaded and pulled from their hands! That said here are some pertinent I hope points of reference in my own research:

The fastest of the Apple/Samsung units: Parts to look for, and test results.

http://forums.macrumors.com/showpost.php?p=20725467&postcount=652

http://forums.macrumors.com/showpost.php?p=20725418&postcount=651

http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?p=20725362&highlight=sm951#post207253 62

Even though you flashed your Mac, it still has the same hardware and slots 3&4 are using a shared bridge. And PCIe 2.0/2.2 are limited to 1500MB/sec but I doubt you would notice.

You would have to use two PCIe controllers to really get beyond 900MB/sec using SATA III, one in slot 2 and one in slot 3 or 4. Also depends on any GPU too. The XP941 uses an adapter but not a controller. No firmware or driver. The 951 and 953 are just showing up so look on MacRumors.

There are some deals on ebay in capacity and performance than the XP941 but not the 95x - uses the same as the nMP 6,1.

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Apple-Samsung-1TB-PCIe-SSD-for-MacBook-Pro-Retina-iMac-M ac-Pro-Late-2013-2014-/151605593746?afsrc=1&rmvSB=true

Long long thread but lots of good info in it. Last page:

http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=1685821&page=34

http://forums.macrumors.com/showpost.php?p=20092951&postcount=298

This XP941 from Newegg 256GB $220 s/h is a nice solid unit

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820147366

Nice adapter: http://www.amazon.com/Sintech-NGFF-PCIe-SATA-Adapter/dp/B00LM4EPF4/

Reply

Answer 3

DPArt

Level 3

604 points

Apr 10, 2015 9:58 PM in response to The hatter

Barefeats.com has a test comparing the recently released drives used in a 2009 and even tested in a 2013.

Reply

Answer 4

The hatter

Level 9

60,990 points

Apr 11, 2015 8:00 AM in response to DPArt

Thanks!

http://barefeats.com/hard200.html

Reply

Answer 5

Apr 11, 2015 5:51 PM in response to The hatter

Thanks, hatter! So, are you saying I would need some sort of additional PCIe controller to use the XP941, or just if I were going to RAID a couple? I have only heard of people using the Lycom DT-120 or the BPlus PCIe 2.0 x4. As I understand it, these are both adapters and do not bring anything else to the table. This is what BareFeats described as using, and they were able to attain 2000+ sequential reads on large files. That is a goal, but I would be ecstatic with a stable system that could do around 1500.

Gina

Reply