3.06Mhz Macbook Pro with 8GB Ram and x-25m SSD...

[plesset]

is ridiculously fast. My xBench score is 230....2 freaking 30. Now I don't put much stock in xBench scores but my previous config was a 2.66Mhz with 8GB Ram and the x-25 and my score was 202. The screen. Oh the screen. I thought the previous generation was good. This is on another level. The warmth and vibrance of the color is noticeably better. I am typing this with Pandora playing and the screen at Max and my battery says I have 5:32 left at 89% full. The SD slot is a nice addition but its hard to get excited about it when I have had laptops 5 years ago that had them. Its nice that Apple finally adopted the standard.

Even though I probably won't use even a tenth of the power this machine offers I am still tempted to buy a second x-25m and rip the optical out and run them in Raid. There is nothing else on the market that even comes close to how great these machines are. Its not subjective...its fact. How anyone could go and buy a Dell and run Vista is beyond me. Those people just don't get it or can't appreciate the state of the art like we can.

 

[iAlex]

is ridiculously fast. My xBench score is 230....2 freaking 30. Now I don't put much stock in xBench scores but my previous config was a 2.66Mhz with 8GB Ram and the x-25 and my score was 202. The screen. Oh the screen. I thought the previous generation was good. This is on another level. The warmth and vibrance of the color is noticeably better. I am typing this with Pandora playing and the screen at Max and my battery says I have 5:32 left at 89% full. The SD slot is a nice addition but its hard to get excited about it when I have had laptops 5 years ago that had them. Its nice that Apple finally adopted the standard.

Even though I probably won't use even a tenth of the power this machine offers I am still tempted to buy a second x-25m and rip the optical out and run them in Raid. There is nothing else on the market that even comes close to how great these machines are. Its not subjective...its fact. How anyone could go and buy a Dell and run Vista is beyond me. Those people just don't get it or can't appreciate the state of the art like we can.

Can you check your profiler and see if you have the 1.5Gbit SATA or the 3.0 Gbit? This would be very useful information.

 

[plesset]

Can you check your profiler and see if you have the 1.5Gbit SATA or the 3.0 Gbit? This would be very useful information.

Uh oh....its 1.5git. WTF?

 

[DAMNiatx]

Uh oh....its 1.5git. WTF?

wow....
whats happen to apple ?
they downgrade the speed!

 

[Bill Gates]

Uh oh....its 1.5git. WTF?

There's no faster way to flip that smile upside-down, eh? It seems like this is a widespread "issue" that needs to be explained or addressed. What I'd like to see is whether or not the same behavior is present under Windows.

 

[J DILLA]

Can you check your profiler and see if you have the 1.5Gbit SATA or the 3.0 Gbit? This would be very useful information.

what does this mean? what is the SATA for

 

[Ploki]

hard drive and optical drive

 

[duffyanneal]

There's no faster way to flip that smile upside-down, eh? It seems like this is a widespread "issue" that needs to be explained or addressed. What I'd like to see is whether or not the same behavior is present under Windows.

Obviously, it's not running at 1.5 Gbs. If his current machine benches faster than the previous uMBP (same drive) which had 3 Gbs then his current machine has to be running at the faster speed. Looks to me like there is a problem with the system profiler. OP, thanks for the information.

 

[iAlex]

Uh oh....its 1.5git. WTF?

Sorry dude, you got shafted like everyone else.

I'd save the $$ on the second x-25 SSD as since you're stuck with a 1.5Gbit bottleneck in the SATA. You wont gain anything in speed, (not as much as you should for that kind of $$$.)

Maybe, you might want to tell Apple how you feel about being sold a expensive SSD upgrade in machine with a outdated SATA: http://www.apple.com/feedback/macbookpro.html

 

[mmoran27]

Can you just post the drive performance part?

The rest of the system may be faster.

 

[Poirot818]

Obviously, it's not running at 1.5 Gbs. If his current machine benches faster than the previous uMBP (same drive) which had 3 Gbs then his current machine has to be running at the faster speed. Looks to me like there is a problem with the system profiler. OP, thanks for the information.

He never gave us the benchmarks for the SSD, only the overall score. The score probably went up due to the better processor.

 

[Bill Gates]

Obviously, it's not running at 1.5 Gbs. If his current machine benches faster than the previous uMBP (same drive) which had 3 Gbs then his current machine has to be running at the faster speed. Looks to me like there is a problem with the system profiler. OP, thanks for the information.

I'm not sure why you posted the image. I put "issue" in quotes because we're not sure at this point if it's a problem with the firmware or drivers, or if it's by design, not because I'm skeptical of the reports coming in. There are more than enough reports to indicate that this is widespread, and obviously not ideal since the previous models all had 3.0Gb SATA. It doesn't have to be running at the faster speed since it can't max out a 1.5Gb connection under all operating conditions.

 

[duffyanneal]

I'm not sure why you posted the image. I put "issue" in quotes because we're not sure at this point if it's a problem with the firmware or drivers, or if it's by design, not because I'm skeptical of the reports coming in. There are more than enough reports to indicate that this is widespread, and obviously not ideal since the previous models all had 3.0Gb SATA.

You get a just for your avatar.

 

[Jiten]

Wow so the I/O downgrade is across the board? There seem to a new 17 unibody owner in the other thread that claims to have the 3gb.

 

[splashnader]

I'm not sure why you posted the image. I put "issue" in quotes because we're not sure at this point if it's a problem with the firmware or drivers, or if it's by design, not because I'm skeptical of the reports coming in. There are more than enough reports to indicate that this is widespread, and obviously not ideal since the previous models all had 3.0Gb SATA. It doesn't have to be running at the faster speed since it can't max out a 1.5Gb connection under all operating conditions.

I have an early 08 MBP, non unibody, and my SATA speed is 1.5gb/s. It always has been.

 

[Bill Gates]

I have an early 08 MBP, non unibody, and my SATA speed is 1.5gb/s. It always has been.

I referred to the immediately previous models of MacBook and MacBook Pro, not the pre-unibody models such as yours.

 

[splashnader]

I referred to the immediately previous models of MacBook and MacBook Pro, not the pre-unibody models such as yours.

I think this is odd, one model change, then a faster speed, another model change and a slower speed. I guess I will go to the apple store tom. Now I am curious.

Thanks for info.

 

[catdog02481]

Hi, my 17 inch new uMBP 2.8Ghz with 4Gb RAM and a 160 GB X25 m benchmarked 227 on xbench.

The profiler shows sata at 3gb/sec

Hope that helps...

 

[bcaslis]

Hi, my 17 inch new uMBP 2.8Ghz with 4Gb RAM and a 160 GB X25 m benchmarked 227 on xbench.

The profiler shows sata at 3gb/sec

Hope that helps...

What were the individual disk numbers? That's what matters for this. I got overall 224 on xbench with a 15" new 2.8GHz with Intel X25M 160GB also.

 

[Unprocessed1]

What were the individual disk numbers? That's what matters for this. I got overall 224 on xbench with a 15" new 2.8GHz with Intel X25M 160GB also.

Go to "about this mac" or whatever its called and there should be tons of data/specs about your mac

 

[zorahk]

I am going to be laughing my ass off if 3.0Gb p/s is now a 17inch "feature"

I just checked system profiler on the computer in my sig, and it says:

NVidia MCP79 AHCI:

Vendor: NVidia
Product: MCP79 AHCI
Speed: 3 Gigabit
Description: AHCI Version 1.20 Supported


Well at least now we know where all that battery life is coming from.

 

[bcaslis]

Go to "about this mac" or whatever its called and there should be tons of data/specs about your mac

What are talking about? I'm asking what disk performance number he got out of xbench on a 17" 2.8 with X25 that report SATA 3.0 Gbits compared to my 15" 2.8 with X25 that report SATA 1.5 Gbits.

 

[michael.lauden]

Sorry dude, you got shafted like everyone else.

I'd save the $$ on the second x-25 SSD as since you're stuck with a 1.5Gbit bottleneck in the SATA. You wont gain anything in speed, (not as much as you should for that kind of $$$.)

Maybe, you might want to tell Apple how you feel about being sold a expensive SSD upgrade in machine with a outdated SATA: http://www.apple.com/feedback/macbookpro.html

man you sure got shafted. so shafted you didn't look up before the purchase, and didn't notice after the change.

 

[t0mat0]

man you sure got shafted. so shafted you didn't look up before the purchase, and didn't notice after the change.

How exactly were people supposed to find out prior to purchase? For starters this is a BTO order. I guess the dust is still going up, let alone settling for the SATA mini-saga.

 

[jav6454]

Uh oh....its 1.5git. WTF?

Apple went down on SATA controller speed. Check this thread for more info. Post up your complete specs of your machine.