Filed under: Accessories, Hardware, Peripherals, Portables, Reviews
TUAW Review: OWC Mercury On-The-Go SSD
A few weeks ago, we ran a short post about the release of OWC's Mercury On-The-Go Solid-State Drives. The drives, which come in the same miniscule transparent drive enclosures used by OWC for the rest of the bus-powered drive line, use SSD technology to provide users with more shock resistance and higher read speeds than traditional "spinning platter" hard drives.OWC provided a demo unit for TUAW to try out, and I had an opportunity to use the drive in both day-to-day Time Machine backup work and for backing up some large video files. While the drives, which come in 64 GB, 128 GB, and 256 GB sizes, are more expensive than their hard drive counterparts, they do offer benefits that may be critical for some users.
How much of a premium will you pay for SSD? The SSD drives (with FireWire 800, FireWire 400, and USB 2.0 interfaces -- see port photo below -- and a 64MB cache) go for US$299.99, US$479.99, or US$779.99 respectively for the 64 GB, 128 GB, and 256 GB versions. Similarly sized hard drives, also with the triple interface but smaller caches, cost US$99.97 for an 80 GB 5200 RPM drive, US$109.99 for a 160 GB 5200 RPM drive, and US$134.99 for a 250 GB 7200 RPM drive. That's a US$645.00 premium for the 256 GB drive! Is it worth the extra cost? It depends...

SSDs also work in more severe temperature extremes, are completely quiet, and the lower power draw means that your laptop is going to stay up and running longer if you're connected to an SSD than if you're using a conventional external hard drive.
The Mercury On-The-Go SSD comes with OWC's usual bundle of software, which includes Data Backup 3, Nova Backup, and SpeedTools Utilities. Most Mac users, however, will probably opt to simply use the drive with Time Machine or a more popular backup utility like SuperDuper. When you pop open the box (see picture below), there are also a full printed Owner's Manual and Windows formatting instructions, a USB 2.0 cable, a FireWire 800 cable, and a FireWire 400 to 800 adapter cable. Since the drive is bus-powered, there is no AC adapter to lug around. One other nice touch -- OWC provides a leather carrying pouch with a soft lined interior for carrying the drive and cables.

My real-world testing involved two steps: performing a first-time Time Machine backup to the drive and reading / writing a video folder from the drive. I wanted to compare the speed of the SSD to a conventional hard drive. For my testing, the throughput was limited by my choice of the USB 2.0 cable, since I was using my MacBook Air as the test platform. The conventional hard drive I used for testing was a bus-powered USB 2.0 drive from Western Digital.
One thing I found a little annoying was that there is a power switch on the device, which (after reading the manual) I found out defaults to a setting that assumes that you have an AC adapter plugged in. Since I didn't, the drive didn't respond when I plugged it in with a USB 2.0 cable. After noticing the switch position information in the manual, I quickly resolved the non-issue and the one blue LED on the front of the drive began to glow.
Here are the results of my tests:
Time Machine Backup - 39.9 GB (SSD): 3 hours, 55 minutes, 02 seconds
Time Machine Backup - 39.9 GB (Conventional Hard Drive): 2 hours, 41 minutes, 50 seconds
Write 658.1 MB - 122 items (SSD): 32.6 seconds
Write 658.1 MB - 122 items (Conventional Hard Drive): 31.7 seconds
Read 658.1 MB - 122 items (SSD): 35.9 seconds
Read 658.1 MB - 122 items (Conventional Hard Drive): 32.5 seconds
So, what happened to that speed advantage? As I noted earlier, both drives were limited by the choice of a USB 2.0 connection, which explains the similar times for most of the tests. OWC's own benchmarks show that USB 2.0 read speeds for the drive max out at about 36 MB/second, while write speeds are limited to near 30 MB/second. For FireWire 800, those speeds are close to 82 MB/second for read, and near 78 MB/second for write.
These speeds are similar to what you'd see with a 7200 RPM conventional hard drive. OWC's benchmarks show that the 250 GB OWC Mercury On-The-Go drive at 7200 RPM has a 74 MB/second read speed and about 73 MB/second write speed. That drive, priced at US$135, is approximately the same capacity of the US$780 SSD drive.
To me, one of the most impressive features was the absolute lack of sound from the drive. I have a very noisy OWC Mercury Elite Pro - AL 1 TB drive on my desktop which I can literally hear from across the house when it's chunking away on a Time Machine backup. I was not able to test the durability of the drive, although I did drop it from the limit of the USB cord's length onto my desktop multiple times during the backup without a hiccup. I also like the way that OWC recesses the ports on the back of the drive so that they're less likely to be damaged in a drop.
Who are OWC's external portable SSD drives for? Mac owners with deep pockets who like to have the latest technology, people who need a durable drive that can withstand drops without a glitch, folks with extremely sensitive hearing who don't like the rattle and hum of conventional hard drives, and people who want the maximum in speed from a portable drive. If you're going to use one of these drives, I would recommend using a FireWire 800 connection to make sure you get the best possible speed out of the drive. If you only have USB 2.0, you're much better off purchasing the much less expensive 7200 RPM conventional drives from OWC.
While I am impressed with the SSD, the current prices and capacities aren't enough to get me excited about buying one. I look forward to seeing what OWC makes available in terms of SSD capabilities in the next few years.
FTC-required legal mumbo jumbo: The Mercury On-The-Go SSD storage solution was provided to TUAW for the review purposes and has since been returned to OWC.

![TUAW [Cafepress]](http://www.blogsmithmedia.com/www.tuaw.com/media/tuaw-cafepress-promo.png)


Reader Comments (Page 1 of 2)
michael.tiojanco said 11:12AM on 10-07-2009
Way to avoid the $11,000 fine with your disclosure!
Reply
Steven Sande said 1:05PM on 10-07-2009
LOL! Yes, we're working on a standard disclosure notice. We don't accept equipment or software, and usually send it on to our readers, but since it looks like the federal government has decided to stick its ever-lengthening nose into blogging, we'll have to disclose and track everything we review.
Steve
matthewluke said 2:17PM on 10-07-2009
Wow...you aren't kidding about the cowboy hat are you? I, for one, am very glad that the government has decided to stick its "ever-lengthening" nose into internet advertising neé product blogging. If you're getting paid by a company (in cash or product) to review something, consumers have the right to know that.
Teddy K said 7:49AM on 10-08-2009
mattluke -
I bet you need the government to wipe for you as well. Start thinking for yourself.
THJ said 11:18AM on 10-07-2009
I agree that external SSDs have limited use (though I'm sure they are fantastic in certain niches). After watching an awe-inspiring youtube video of someone opening 50 apps simultaneously on a MBP w/ SSD, I REEEEEEALLY want to get an internal SSD as a boot drive on my next desktop. Hopefully the new iMacs will have an SSD option, I'm too much of a wuss to void the warranty and DIY.
Reply
Joseph said 11:54AM on 10-07-2009
when we outgrew our tape backup we decided to move to 2.5" hdds. We have since gone back to tapes and used multiple tapes. the hdds could not handle all the travel. If you truly travel w/ your drive this this may be a good option. other than that, i can't imagine that anything can realize the speed.
Craig said 12:25PM on 10-07-2009
The next best thing is the Western Digital VelociRaptor (10,000 RPMs) you'll need the Drive Bay adaptor from MaxUpgrades to install it in a Mac Pro but it's well worth it! My 3 year old Mac Pro is like a new machine!
http://www.wdc.com/en/products/products.asp?DriveID=494
http://www.maxupgrades.com/istore/index.cfm?fuseaction=product.display&product_id=180
PSM said 11:24AM on 10-07-2009
I really don't have the need for an SSD external drive (or the finances for an internal one!) but just wanted to say I've had a great experience with OWC's enclosure. That one that's pictured with FW800 and USB is really nice. At the time I bought mine they had the only 2.5" one I could find that supported both formats.
Reply
brombl said 12:28PM on 10-07-2009
Agreed! I'm a media professional, and I've had far too many Lacie enclosures go belly-up. OWC has offered these small, bus-powered enclosures with high-speed HDDs in them for a while now, and they're great. I have a pile of them lying around, none have failed me yet. Assuming they're putting quality SSDs inside these (I have no reason to believe otherwise), I'd definitely trust them.
Rob said 11:37AM on 10-07-2009
You never really compared the two drives; both were bottlenecked by USB 2.0, and as such your review leaves no real world indication as to which one is faster using firewire. Over USB, it seems a conventional drive wins, which makes this a very unappealing product based on this review, although it was probably an inferior USB controller on the SSD...
Reply
Joseph said 12:00PM on 10-07-2009
I agree. why would you not test fw800 atleast.
I think it is a design flaw to not have eSata. I understand it would increase the cost, but at $800 for the 256gb, it really would be a minimal increase. This would open up a whole new market of speed.
USB 2 - 540mbit
FW400 - 400mbit
fw800 - 800mbit
would have been nice to test all ports against a 7200rpm 2.5" hdd or two.
Even a free download of a hdd benching software would have atleast yielded some nice bar graphs. check out what anandtech, barefeats, tomshardware and the like do when they test something like this.
My thought is, you will have a hard time getting another free product to test, not because of your results, but because of your methods.
Greenie said 11:42AM on 10-07-2009
I'm not sure the benefits of external, if any.
But, I recently traded in my 5 month old HD equipped MacBook Air for a brand new one with SSD. I LOVE, LOVE, LOVE it. So fast and quiet.
Reply
Snap said 12:14PM on 10-07-2009
The benefits of external are huge. I run applications off a Firewire 800 drive all day and it's way faster than running off my internal Macbook Pro drive.
Matthew Sandoval said 1:36PM on 10-07-2009
I'm sorry, but I just don't understand the point of a review like this done solely over USB. You really should have titled it "OWC Mercury On-The-Go SSD -- Worth it for Macbook Air Users?" since that is the only group of Mac owners for whom a USB-only review is relevant.
I've liked some of your other reviews but this one is just a waste of time.
Reply
jacquesass said 12:24PM on 10-07-2009
I think that using this drive - over USB - for Time Machine backups completely misses the point. You should hook this up over FW800 and use it to capture and playback multiple video streams at once. Maybe use it as a portable boot disk in a shop with a variety of FW800 Macs (i.e., a portable home folder).
What would I do with it? Swap the SSD for my internal HD and use the great OWC case to repurpose my old drive.
Reply
rwzehr said 12:21PM on 10-07-2009
So why didn't you show use the test results if FW800 was used?
Reply
jb510 said 12:27PM on 10-07-2009
Seriously? What a freaking waste! You wrote all these and didn't bother to compoare them on anything other than USB 2. This article should have been about. How crapp USB is and ignored the fact that you has an SSD to test... Only that story has been done 10000 times before.... Way to blow an opportunity to write something original, I would expect OWC to be sending TUAW any more products to test so pathetically.
Reply
OWC Grant said 2:35PM on 10-07-2009
WOW...glad to see this is a hot topic for all. We have done some benchmark testing and have found performance increases across the board. File transfer speeds are just one aspect to look at...what really blew us away was the boot times and app load times.
Using an 64GB SSD equipped On-The-Go "Triple Interface" model connected via FW800 to a 2.26Ghz 13" MBP, 2GB RAM, we achieved:
Boot Times:
SSD: 12.4 seconds
7200: 25.3 seconds
5400: 31.4 seconds
App Launch times:
SSD
Mail: .6 seconds
IChat: .6 seconds
Safari: .6 seconds
Itunes: 1.3 seconds
7200
Mail: 1.0 seconds
IChat: .6 seconds
Safari: .9 seconds
Itunes: 1.3 seconds
5400
Mail: 1.8 seconds
IChat: 1.3 seconds
Safari: 1.4 seconds
Itunes: 1.5 seconds
Then...with that same SSD drive but installed into some "legacy" MacBook and iMac machines, we found even greater gains...visit our blog entry to see them:
http://blog.macsales.com/2303-breathe-new-life-into-your-mac-with-ssd
Hope this info sheds some new light on subject for all!
Reply
OWC Grant said 1:43PM on 10-07-2009
Oh...should add the file transfer test via FW800 ;-)
2009 MP 2.93Ghz 8GB Ram
16GB File Transfer
SSD: 04:14
7200:04:16
5400:05:46
Reply
Jon Niola said 1:56PM on 10-07-2009
Grant how about hooking a brother up with a test unit for like a couple of years ;)
Reply