Do new iMacs have SATA3 ?

Discussion in 'iMac' started by deadbear, May 3, 2011.

  1. deadbear macrumors newbie

    deadbear

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2011
    Location:
    Alberta
    #1
    I have tried searching, but couldn't find the answer.
    I phoned Apple and asked the question and they said no. I asked is it the ssd drive that isn't SATA3 or the logic board and they couldn't answer.
    Anybody know?
     
  2. Badger^2 macrumors 68000

    Badger^2

    Joined:
    Oct 29, 2009
    Location:
    Sacramento
    #2
  3. deadbear thread starter macrumors newbie

    deadbear

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2011
    Location:
    Alberta
    #3
    Thanks for the reply, but I meant SATA3 which is 6/GBs.
    It is important as it is the current standard. So in 2 years time it will definitely matter in terms of resale
     
  4. smiddlehurst macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2007
    #4
    Why? It's stupidly tricky to replace the internal drive on an iMac, there's no esata port and there's two Thunderbolt ports for external drives. How would not having SATA3 affect resale values in any way?
     
  5. glitch44 macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Feb 28, 2006
    #5
    Personally, I want SATA III to use the full potential of a third party SSD. It's a difficult install, but you only have to do it once.
     
  6. deadbear thread starter macrumors newbie

    deadbear

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2011
    Location:
    Alberta
    #6
    I don't know what I'm failing to convey. I want to order a 2011 iMac with an Apple SSD The new Macbook Pro's are SATA 3, just trying to confirm the new iMacs are. Not really interested if anyone feels this is important or not. We all have are own opinions. Just looking for this elusive specification.
     
  7. DeaconGraves macrumors 65816

    DeaconGraves

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2007
    Location:
    Dallas, TX
    #7
    Apple doesn't get that detailed in its specifications. Wait for these guys to tear one down (probably within the next week). http://www.ifixit.com/
     
  8. pcguru83 macrumors 6502a

    pcguru83

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2006
    Location:
    Charlotte, NC
    #8
    I'm with you deadbear, it's a very legitimate question, I don't know what is up with the hostility. :p SATA III is virtually a given though IMO.
     
  9. Tom Sawyer, May 3, 2011
    Last edited: May 3, 2011

    Tom Sawyer macrumors 6502a

    Tom Sawyer

    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2007
    #9
    If your confortable with working on mechanical devices, electronics etc then it's actually not that bad at all. Just a matter of taking ones time and being careful. Naturally opening up a computer is not for everyone! This is my HD upgrade procedure from 2007, iMac HD Upgrade, and the new machines are even easier as you do not have to remove the frame (screen unbolts right after you pull the glass).

    IMHO, Sata III / 6G is very important as there are already SSD's that significantly exceed Sata II specs limit and actually approach the speed of Sata III at 500+ MB/Sec. The lack of Sata III in my 2010 Mac Pro is what is keeping me from buying one of the new Vertex III or OWC 6G SSD's. When I had a 27" i7 iMac, I enjoyed the form factor (just not the glossy screen) and not hanging lots of peripherals off of it. Not having an external drive cluttering up the desk is part of the draw of the all-in-one form factor.
     
  10. dubAdub macrumors member

    dubAdub

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2011
    Location:
    Bray, Ireland
    #10
    SATA 3 is high up on my must have list. IMO it would be a deal breaker if it didn't have it.
     
  11. CHSeifert, May 3, 2011
    Last edited by a moderator: Jul 24, 2011

    CHSeifert macrumors 6502

    CHSeifert

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2010
    Location:
    Copenhagen, Denmark - Scandinavia
    #11
    It has SATA 3 - all new motherboards with Sandy Bridge CPU and the new chipsets have SATA 3 built in.

    I would be very surprised if Apple used old tech from mid 2010 in new iMac 2011 machines !!!
     
  12. ndraves macrumors member

    Joined:
    Jan 19, 2011
    Location:
    UK
    #12
    I would be a real let down not to have SATA III. The main reason is a mentioned for a 3rd party SSD. The first I'd do if I was going to buy one is pull the screen and fit a OCZ Vertex 3.

    I have a Vertex 2 in my Mac Pro and it is sooo much better than a mechanical HDD and a SATA III SSD would make it better.
     
  13. deadbear thread starter macrumors newbie

    deadbear

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2011
    Location:
    Alberta
    #13
    Hey guys thanks for all the great info. Do you think with the 4-6 week delay in ordering an iMac configured from Apple with the SSD that they might be changing the drive to something newer?
     
  14. kevin2223 macrumors member

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2010
    #14
    Sadly, OWC has torn down the iMacs and has found the following: "All the internal SATA connections are SATA II (3.0Gb/s) bus speeds."

    OWC Blog
     
  15. theSeb macrumors 604

    theSeb

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2010
    Location:
    Poole, England
    #15
    It's called SATA III. It does matter.

    OP, yes, more than likely the new iMac has at least two SATA III ports on the motherboard. I cannot fathom it not being there considering these are SB processors and the MBP has at least one SATA III port (although some are claiming that it has 2).
     
  16. philipma1957 macrumors 603

    philipma1957

    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2010
    Location:
    Howell, New Jersey
    #16
    last years macs not 2011's.. as for putting a vetex 3 and a 3tb hdd in the new imac in the name of form or using t-bolt and buying the basic 1tb for function pick either one or even both..


    finally and imac that gives you the option to do so. Form is nice for some.. Myself i side with function but if you give me choice better yet!
     
  17. Badger^2 macrumors 68000

    Badger^2

    Joined:
    Oct 29, 2009
    Location:
    Sacramento
    #17
    And that saves everyone money. No need to spring for the SATAIII 6G drives.

    And since apple uses crap SSDs, even less of a reason to have SATAIII
     
  18. kevin2223 macrumors member

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2010
    #18
    Look at the comments above that one, which are as follows:

    "Will these new iMacs support your new 6G SSD?"

    --"In checking system profiler, we found that the SATA bus is 3.0Gb/s. So while they would certainly be compatible, they would be limited to 3Gb/s speeds."
     
  19. ndraves macrumors member

    Joined:
    Jan 19, 2011
    Location:
    UK
    #19
    This looks a bit vague. If it was the 2011 iMac then there would be a big take apart article. Anyway it seems that no-one actually has the iMac in hand yet.

    I'd wait and see a little longer. I know I wish I has SATA III on my MP!
     
  20. theSeb macrumors 604

    theSeb

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2010
    Location:
    Poole, England
    #20
    This is a 2010 iMac.
     
  21. kevin2223 macrumors member

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2010
    #21
    OWC already dissected a 3.1GHz QC 27" and a 2.7GHz QC 21.5" model and has found this information in the System Profiler.
     
  22. philipma1957 macrumors 603

    philipma1957

    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2010
    Location:
    Howell, New Jersey
    #22
    here read this pull from owc on your link: they did not tear down a 2011:

    We’ll be getting ours in soon, so be sure to keep an eye out here on the OWC Blog for benchmarking results, compatibility reports and other important info regarding these new additions to the iMac line.
     
  23. theSeb macrumors 604

    theSeb

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2010
    Location:
    Poole, England
    #23
    I struggle to believe that. I am dumbfounded and would like some confirmation.
     
  24. kevin2223 macrumors member

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2010
    #24
    Are these 2010 iMacs that have 3.1GHz and 2.7GHz quad cores? They are 2011 models they purchased from Apple Retail stores and already took them apart.

    http://blog.macsales.com/9995-2011-imac-unboxing-teardown
     
  25. philipma1957 macrumors 603

    philipma1957

    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2010
    Location:
    Howell, New Jersey
    #25
    you are correct the other gentlemen read the blog wrong.. the comment part of the blog is about 2010 not 2011 and that quote refers to a question about 2010 ..



    kevin go ask on the blog instead of arguing with me.. that part of the blog has a question on 2010 and the answer you quote is about the 2010. read the page slowly or just ask on the blog. in fact i will ask
     

Share This Page