i dunno if anyone said this but, maybe it will be 3 Gb/s on snow leopard.
i didn't read whether or not it is a hard ware or software issue
i didn't read whether or not it is a hard ware or software issue
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
It's pretty confirmed that it's not the operating system, since other versions of OS X and Windows all have the same problem. Firmware is much more likely.
Well I'm pretty sure it will be a firmware issue. Just wait for a fix I guess. I'm not too worried since I don't use a SSD...
My Intel x25-m arrived yesterday. Yes, it runs at 1.5Gb and Yes, I can not even notice how it will be faster. I log in on 15 seconds, open all the applications I want via quicksilver inmediatly. Come on, it's a little annoying but +1000 complaints inside this topic...
Let's wait for Cupertino
Let's wait for Cupertino
This thread is too much fun! Here's my question: given the current
1.5 Gbps limit, will I, or will I not, see a performance difference between
the Apple CTO SSDs (either 128 GB or 256 GB) and one of the
latest, fastest, Intels or Corsairs (that I swap in myself)? I get
that the SATA downgrade can essentially halve sequential
read/write speeds for the fast SSDs; does this mean that there's
no longer _any_ benefit to putting in an Intel or a Corsair oneself
(other than saving some money)?
I guess I could answer this myself if I knew exactly what
models are possible as Apple CTO SSDs, but the most detail
I've found, here and elsewhere, is "Samsung" and "Toshiba", which is
rather vague.
1.5 Gbps limit, will I, or will I not, see a performance difference between
the Apple CTO SSDs (either 128 GB or 256 GB) and one of the
latest, fastest, Intels or Corsairs (that I swap in myself)? I get
that the SATA downgrade can essentially halve sequential
read/write speeds for the fast SSDs; does this mean that there's
no longer _any_ benefit to putting in an Intel or a Corsair oneself
(other than saving some money)?
I guess I could answer this myself if I knew exactly what
models are possible as Apple CTO SSDs, but the most detail
I've found, here and elsewhere, is "Samsung" and "Toshiba", which is
rather vague.
You'll still see a benefit as the I/O and random reads and writes of the Intel are better than the Apple CTO SSDs.
Apple: "We are investigating this matter."
That's probably what you'll get. Saved you the wait.
LOL!
How true. I think they'll eventually get around to addressing it but not anytime soon. There's this little thing called the new iPhone that's probably keeping everyone occupied for a little while.Apple priority ranking?
iPhone 3GS > iPhone 3G > iPhone 2G > iPod Touch > Other iPods? > MacBooks > Accessories > Macs???
iPhone 3GS > iPhone 3G > iPhone 2G > iPod Touch > Other iPods? > MacBooks > Accessories > Macs???
i'm not sure if others have already reported this yet or not but...
i just got my mbp 13" with a 128gb ssd by fedex about 10min ago. i can confirm that the sata is 1.5.
like i wrote in another forum here, i got my ssd as much for durability as speed, so i'm not too disappointed. that said, 3.0 sure would be a nice boost, so i hope it's a firmware fix and apple addresses is quickly.
i just got my mbp 13" with a 128gb ssd by fedex about 10min ago. i can confirm that the sata is 1.5.
like i wrote in another forum here, i got my ssd as much for durability as speed, so i'm not too disappointed. that said, 3.0 sure would be a nice boost, so i hope it's a firmware fix and apple addresses is quickly.
response from support
I just heard back from Apple support and the official engineering comment is that they are investigating the issue. That in itself was not very helpful, but the rep did mention that they might publish/email the official specifications of the Macbooks.
I would like to know which bone head made the decision to deploy with SATA I?
I just heard back from Apple support and the official engineering comment is that they are investigating the issue. That in itself was not very helpful, but the rep did mention that they might publish/email the official specifications of the Macbooks.
I would like to know which bone head made the decision to deploy with SATA I?
At this point I'd really just like clarification on if its a hardware or firmware issue. If they say, yes it's SATA I for life then so be it, but at least I'll have confidence in purchasing the MBP knowing that they won't silently update a piece of hardware in the next few weeks.
If they're saying they might publish/email the specs then that's not a good sign that they'll push out a firmware upgrade. It probably means they'll just say that's how it's designed.
Downgrading from 3.0 to 1.5 can result in up to 5% slower speed even with HDDs, despite the fact that they wouldn't come close to saturating the bandwidth in a million years.
Lenovo did a similar thing on some models (downgraded from SATA II to I, the reason was apparently that SATA II had some compatibility issues with PATA-SATA drives and optical drives), and there was a similar uproar, so they posted an official response specifying exactly what the impact on speed would be according to their lab tests. That's where I got the <5% figure for HDDs.
Discouraging News...
Hi all,
I've been following this thread like a Hawk, as I'm, sure many of you new MBP owners (and potential owners) have also been.
I came across this article posted by ComptuerWorld today and it doesn't look like good news. Industry experts are speculating Apple may have been seeing data error problems at higher I/O rates with the 3Gbit/sec SATA interface. "It may be that those were higher error rates than they preferred," was the comment one expert said.
If this is the case, it's unlikely that apple will upgrade the firmware, assuming they were limiting the interface by software (and not by hardware). Even if they bowed to pressure and released an upgrade, it might translate to higher data error issues at the faster speeds. I really don't want to believe this, but this is the newest interpretation.
I think that we have all but ruled out any battery life and cost savings from downgrading to 1.5 Gb/s and so, assuming this wasn't some glaring oversight on the part of Apple engineers, it seems like a reasonable hypothesis. I must also assume, because none of Apple's current drives saturated the 1.5 Gb/s SATA that they figured it would be a minimal impact to most users. Us DIY upgraders and the like may be out of luck...
What a disaster....
http://www.computerworld.com/action/article.do?command=viewArticleBasic&articleId=9134529&intsrc=news_ts_head
Hi all,
I've been following this thread like a Hawk, as I'm, sure many of you new MBP owners (and potential owners) have also been.
I came across this article posted by ComptuerWorld today and it doesn't look like good news. Industry experts are speculating Apple may have been seeing data error problems at higher I/O rates with the 3Gbit/sec SATA interface. "It may be that those were higher error rates than they preferred," was the comment one expert said.
If this is the case, it's unlikely that apple will upgrade the firmware, assuming they were limiting the interface by software (and not by hardware). Even if they bowed to pressure and released an upgrade, it might translate to higher data error issues at the faster speeds. I really don't want to believe this, but this is the newest interpretation.
I think that we have all but ruled out any battery life and cost savings from downgrading to 1.5 Gb/s and so, assuming this wasn't some glaring oversight on the part of Apple engineers, it seems like a reasonable hypothesis. I must also assume, because none of Apple's current drives saturated the 1.5 Gb/s SATA that they figured it would be a minimal impact to most users. Us DIY upgraders and the like may be out of luck...
What a disaster....
http://www.computerworld.com/action/article.do?command=viewArticleBasic&articleId=9134529&intsrc=news_ts_head
Unless 17" MBP and MacBook White use significantly different optical drives (SATA 3 Gb/s?), it's unlikely. They said it is unknown whether 17", MB White or MBA are affected, but we already know they aren't. SD card readers seem more likely from this point of view, but then they don't use SATA interface at all. The only other change was Firewire 800 in 13", but again, it shouldn't affect SATA, not to mention it was already in previous generation 15" and 17".
ROAR!
I guess I'll be passing those in line to get iPhone 3G S to make a return of this 13" MBP before June 26th. I love the machine, but honestly its not much of an upgrade now from my 2007 MBP 15".