Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
13" and 15" MacBook Pros Have a Slower SATA Interface
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
- Status
HD Tune is the standard for doing drive benchmarks.
Apple is one of the few companies that I know of where a step backward is a step forward. It might go along with the whole miniaturization fetish.
Apple is one of the few companies that I know of where a step backward is a step forward. It might go along with the whole miniaturization fetish.
1.5 Gigibits per second = 187.5 Megabytes per Second.
From what I saw, the WD VelociRaptor (which I believe is currently the fastest hard drive available) averages about 100 Megabytes per second.
Intel's X25 SSD can do over 200 Megabytes per second according to a benchmark I saw, but real world applications don't see THAT much of a performance increase.
Yeah it is strange they went backwards, but its really not that big of a deal.
If it is true that it is the same hardware as previous 3.0Gb systems (as someone here said), this can almost certainly be upgraded via software. Heck, maybe it even automatically sets it based on what's attached. I wouldn't put it past them...
jorj
From what I saw, the WD VelociRaptor (which I believe is currently the fastest hard drive available) averages about 100 Megabytes per second.
Intel's X25 SSD can do over 200 Megabytes per second according to a benchmark I saw, but real world applications don't see THAT much of a performance increase.
Yeah it is strange they went backwards, but its really not that big of a deal.
If it is true that it is the same hardware as previous 3.0Gb systems (as someone here said), this can almost certainly be upgraded via software. Heck, maybe it even automatically sets it based on what's attached. I wouldn't put it past them...
jorj
I'll put money that this is just a strategic move by Apple to get people to quietly deplete their inventory of the SATA I and then a few months down the road another 'quiet' update will be made that reintroduces the 3.0. Apple has a strong history of screwing over early adopters of all of its products in some way (as the last aluminum macbook buyers from only a few months ago are finding out right now) and I'm sure this is following the same trend.
Just wait a few months and you'll see the 'issue' will be resolved quietly and buy it then.
Just wait a few months and you'll see the 'issue' will be resolved quietly and buy it then.
Whatever it takes to get you through the day. It isn't like your laptop turned into a pumpkin the moment they started waving new ones around on stage at WWDC. It isn't like my late '08 MBP turned into a pumpkin when they updated it to 2.66Ghz for the one you've got.
I really don't understand this obsession with lusting after the latest and greatest when you wouldn't even know it was different to what you already had without reading the specs.
Don't the USB and Firewire ports also connect to CPU on a SATA bus? I might be wrong on that or just not understand it, but if that's the case it seems to me like that's where the real performance hit would come from if everything is now running off a 1.5 bus instead of 3.0. Which realistically might be plenty of bandwidth for most people, but keeping in mind these are the PRO machines and many of them will probably have a lot of digital video cameras and multichannel audio interfaces + external hard drives all running at the same time. Seems like that could be a serious set back.
Going SATA 150 will not improve battery life, if anything with a spinning disk the faster it is the less work it has to do, there for more battery life.
However there is no mechanical drive nor SSD in a single disk configuration that can max out SATA 150 so there would be no battery life difference ether way.
However there is no mechanical drive nor SSD in a single disk configuration that can max out SATA 150 so there would be no battery life difference ether way.
Completely incorrect. SSD have an idle and workload power. For example, the Intel X25-M lists its idle power consumption at 0.06W and the "typical workload" power consumption at 150mW.
I think the user reports might be exaggerated. Maybe it's taking 10 seconds to open 30 applications rather than the usual 6 seconds. Stuff like that.
Firewire is not build onto Nvidea Chipset.
USB is built onto Nvidea Chipset.
No Nvidea chipset with the 9400m has a SATA 150 only controller.
SATA 300 is built onto the Nvidea Chipset.
The GPU is build onto the Nvidea Chipset.
The memory controller is build onto the Nvidea Chipset.
The other chips is the "i am a apple" chip, and the CPU.
NO IT'S NOT. Please stop spreading these completely untrue rumors. Reading the front page of MR it only affects people that want to use SSD's.
Battery life in NOT increasing. That's rubbish.
...Yeah I'm sure the battery life was improved just because they downgraded the SATA connection to 1.5 Gbit/s.
Are you serious with that link? Did you forget that the new MBPs have the new and bigger batteries in them like the previous 17" MBP?
Did you have a SSD before?
If not then you wont know any different.
If yes then you wont know any different.
Yes, and people who actually know how the technology works have swiftly debunked that rumor.
This is a 2nd generation product of the unibody, however, and that is unacceptable.
Did you really expect Apple to do that? Apple is a corporation with obligations to its shareholders, and we all know that verity and business never go together.
I'm curious to know why you absolutely state that it's a cost saving maneuver by Apple when it's the same chip as the faster previous version ?
To me, it looks like a bug.
Cheaper Premium
But I thought that Apple sold a premium only computers. That means for a higher base price we expect no cuts to make the Mac or iPod a little cheaper for Apple to produce. But the removal of FW from iPods at a time when FW was becoming standard even on the $299+ computers in favor of the cheaper poorer slower operating USB. So we know that Apple has done it in the past.
Also with more & more removing their optical drives in their Mac laptops & putting a second 7200 rpm HDD or SDD. With either of these choices the slower older technology can not meet the needed bandwidth. Then not only will all SDD be slowed, the HDD users will enjoy watching their new systems slow down compared to their old. This shows that Macs can run with older technology even after it has been replaced by everyone else.
This is just another example that shows that only the 17" Intel MacBook Pro should carry the Pro name.
But I thought that Apple sold a premium only computers. That means for a higher base price we expect no cuts to make the Mac or iPod a little cheaper for Apple to produce. But the removal of FW from iPods at a time when FW was becoming standard even on the $299+ computers in favor of the cheaper poorer slower operating USB. So we know that Apple has done it in the past.
Also with more & more removing their optical drives in their Mac laptops & putting a second 7200 rpm HDD or SDD. With either of these choices the slower older technology can not meet the needed bandwidth. Then not only will all SDD be slowed, the HDD users will enjoy watching their new systems slow down compared to their old. This shows that Macs can run with older technology even after it has been replaced by everyone else.
This is just another example that shows that only the 17" Intel MacBook Pro should carry the Pro name.
Alright. I'm pretty furious this very second. Just about an hour ago I plunked down nearly 2 grand between a new macbook pro and an x25-m. Should I cancel my order ASAP? Realistically is it going to be a big deal?
If it's the same hardware, then that means it is possible for a software unlock? Help me. Someone tell me what to do. I don't want to have spent money for something worthless now.
If it's the same hardware, then that means it is possible for a software unlock? Help me. Someone tell me what to do. I don't want to have spent money for something worthless now.
- Status