I hate Apple. I bought a 128gb samsung ssd specifically for the 13 inch pro. I actually noticed that the bootup was alot slower than other people using macs with this drive. Applications don't open up immediately like my previous ssd apple macbook air. I originally thought that there was a problem with the drive itself. I thought that the 13 inch pro was absolutely perfect but yet again Apple cheaps out on us again. If this issue isn't resolved by a firmware update of some sort, I'm finished with Apple.
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" Mbp Only 1.5gb Sata ? - SOLVED!!!!!!!!!
- Thread starter MacModMachine
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
did you swap the ssd yourself? if so, try repairing permissions in disk utility. app loading and boot time should have no effect by the cap
I _was_ going to upgrade to the new 13" MBP. I looking into putting 2 SSD's into it, using the adapters I read about on these forums. Glad I searched here first and came across this thread. Guess I'm going to stick with my white nVidia MB for now.
my question is will the 13 inch apple configured MBP with the 128GB SSD have a 3GB or 1.5GB sata? I just cant see them with the 1.5GB - I wish someone had one of those to compare?
I would alos love to see a benchmark of the latest MBA with the 128GB SSD - it is 3.0 still? Go figure.
I would alos love to see a benchmark of the latest MBA with the 128GB SSD - it is 3.0 still? Go figure.
SATA I will only bottleneck you at 110-120 MB/s, Air's SSD is ~80 MB/s at reads. Also I don't think Samsung's SSDs are fast enough to require SATA II (although I might be wrong about it, maybe they have new ones now that do). I'm afraid if your computer feels slower than MBA, your problem lies elsewhere.
We don't know at this time as they have not been released. Apple support has stated to one person that ordered computers with ssd should have 3.0 but for now it's a waiting game on that one. It would not be the first time a salesperson said too much to get a sale.
you would think that someone at apple HQ would have one of the MBP 13 SSD models and could answer that simple question on the SSD interface speed.
On another note - I have put my intel X25 160GB SSD in my new MBP 13 and I am wondering even with the SATA cap would it be faster or slower than the 128GB in the latest Macbook air?
On another note how with the SATA cap at 1.5GB effect me for everyday use compared to using the X25 at 3.0GB - I wonder if i would even notice. For instance would apps or the OS launch any faster or slower with the 1.5GB cap - I mean does it effect stuff like that?
On another note - I have put my intel X25 160GB SSD in my new MBP 13 and I am wondering even with the SATA cap would it be faster or slower than the 128GB in the latest Macbook air?
On another note how with the SATA cap at 1.5GB effect me for everyday use compared to using the X25 at 3.0GB - I wonder if i would even notice. For instance would apps or the OS launch any faster or slower with the 1.5GB cap - I mean does it effect stuff like that?
Maybe not, maybe if enough end-users voice their dismay Apple will issue an update or address it immediately in manufacturing. In this economy people are spending hard earned dollars and it's not unreasonable for people to expect a new MBP to be capable of adapting to the current industry trends (like the move towards SSD) for a period of 12-24 months after purchase. With a downgraded 1.5Gbit SATA, it creates a very serious limit in useful product life, especially in an industry turning to multi-core CPU, and improvements in RAM and storage speed to keep driving the market forward. A 10-20% discount as a refurb is meaningless, look at all of the early Core Duo early C2D's with 2 and 3 GB limits in RAM, The industry move towards 64bit apps, and the new SL will make these boat anchors.
I would have to agree that for MOST users this apparent change from 3Gb to 1.5Gb SATA is a non-issue and should make little difference in real-world operations. However...
I know that when I upgraded my 1st generation Mac Pro to a RAID 0, two drive set that the only differences I saw in real-world performance were in large file copies and duplication, in some Photoshop operations on large files (history and caching), and in exporting large video files from iMovie. In some cases the differences in time were very substantial but they seldom equaled the raw improvements I saw in simple disk i/o benchmarks.
However, I saw no differences in boot times, program open times, or in the vast majority of operations in Photoshop. I also attempted to see if virtual memory performance had been affected and I was never able to find a test that revealed any improvements.
The reason why I mention these tests is that they are real-world results in a configuration that would bear some similarities to the difference you would likely see between running a FAST SSD over 1.5Gb versus 3Gb SATA. However, RAID HD sets and SSDs have different characteristics and the biggest improvements I saw were in write times which are an area where SSDs do not show as great of gains (SSDs are stronger in reads and random access times, with the latter being by far the most significant in terms of improvements over HDs).
I know that when I upgraded my 1st generation Mac Pro to a RAID 0, two drive set that the only differences I saw in real-world performance were in large file copies and duplication, in some Photoshop operations on large files (history and caching), and in exporting large video files from iMovie. In some cases the differences in time were very substantial but they seldom equaled the raw improvements I saw in simple disk i/o benchmarks.
However, I saw no differences in boot times, program open times, or in the vast majority of operations in Photoshop. I also attempted to see if virtual memory performance had been affected and I was never able to find a test that revealed any improvements.
The reason why I mention these tests is that they are real-world results in a configuration that would bear some similarities to the difference you would likely see between running a FAST SSD over 1.5Gb versus 3Gb SATA. However, RAID HD sets and SSDs have different characteristics and the biggest improvements I saw were in write times which are an area where SSDs do not show as great of gains (SSDs are stronger in reads and random access times, with the latter being by far the most significant in terms of improvements over HDs).
Model Name: MacBook Pro
Model Identifier: MacBookPro5,1
Processor Name: Intel Core 2 Duo
Processor Speed: 2.4 GHz
Vendor: NVidia
Product: MCP79 AHCI
Speed: 3 Gigabit
Description: AHCI Version 1.20 Supported
Model Identifier: MacBookPro5,1
Processor Name: Intel Core 2 Duo
Processor Speed: 2.4 GHz
Vendor: NVidia
Product: MCP79 AHCI
Speed: 3 Gigabit
Description: AHCI Version 1.20 Supported
Ah, I somehow missed that after reading all these replies. Apple should be able to fix it with a firmware update then.
Judging by this thread, Apple clearly has customers who demand the best.
I think that's what we get.
However, with every new product there is always some issue that the most demanding customers latch on to, something that could be even better. That's OK, because it helps to make sure that Macs get better with every generation.
I know some people seem to be very upset about this issue, but if this is the biggest problem with the new MacBook Pro, then it's made my mind up for me....I'm off to place my order now!
I think that's what we get.
However, with every new product there is always some issue that the most demanding customers latch on to, something that could be even better. That's OK, because it helps to make sure that Macs get better with every generation.
I know some people seem to be very upset about this issue, but if this is the biggest problem with the new MacBook Pro, then it's made my mind up for me....I'm off to place my order now!
Thanks, up to know no body has explained the effect as good as you. So why all this fuss. I mean i can't imagine that all the people in this thread are exporting movies or doing big photoshop jobs. Fair enough, moving large files could be a common procedure, but if your analysis is right, then i think people are exaggerating a bit. When i saw all the complains, i though this speed issue affect booting, opening programs, and executing every day tasks.
I know it's kind of like yelling "Fire!" in a crowded auditorium, but one SPECULATION that I haven't yet seen is that this change may be the result of Apple finding a bug or limitation in the new MacBook Pro design. Both the 13" and 15" models have a new motherboard design and maybe they discovered a design error that forced them to limit the SATA speed to 1.5Gb. Frankly, I can't see that this would have been done purposely for either cost or power savings, but errors (or bugs) do happen so it's something to consider. Of course, even if this is true they might be able to find a firmware or software workaround so help could be on the way.
The reason this SPECULATION fits is that both the MacBook Air and the 17" MacBook Pro continue to have 3Gb SATA and these two units apparently did not get a motherboard redesign.
In any case, for hard drive users it's not an issue (only solid-state drive users need to be concerned).
The reason this SPECULATION fits is that both the MacBook Air and the 17" MacBook Pro continue to have 3Gb SATA and these two units apparently did not get a motherboard redesign.
In any case, for hard drive users it's not an issue (only solid-state drive users need to be concerned).
The analysis may be right as to the RAID, but SSD has an entirely different effect. Even a light user will notice the benefits of SSD. It significantly improves boot time, launch times, every common task. It's hard to explain to someone who hasn't used it. We expect to have to wait for certain things - for example, opening a folder with lots of pictures and waiting for thumbnails to load, even if only for a few seconds. If you think about it, it doesn't matter - a second or two, who cares. I used to think so as well - until I realized how good it felt to reduce these minor annoyances. That's why people who come from much better Macs in terms of raw speed often call Air with SSD "amazingly fast". It feels fast. And it's easy to get spoiled.
Well, I'll have to admit that if you are using a FAST Solid-State Drive (SSD) then you may see some differences in system boot and program opening times. However, those differences are likely going to be fairly small (maybe a few seconds or a bit more) and in most cases these are the types of things that you typically do only a few times each day.
C'mon guys, does it matter if the difference is small or large? How about this, what will the difference be like in 2 years? Probably much more significant. Fact of the matter is, it's very obsolete technology and should NOT be what's in the pro systems.
Here's a crazy question: do you guys think they aren't shipping the BTO systems with the SSD drives until they fix the problem?
Here's a crazy question: do you guys think they aren't shipping the BTO systems with the SSD drives until they fix the problem?
Just to clarify, the only models that apparently have SATA 1 are the models with the SD card reader. I see a correlation here.
I wonder why there is no post on the Apple.com discussions?
Either I am looking in the wrong place or it has been removed.
Either I am looking in the wrong place or it has been removed.