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.
Intel's Z68 Chipset to Bring SSD Caching to Sandy Bridge
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
One of the major functions of a Thunderbolt Port is daisy chaining devices, which means, you would only ever need ONE (1) Thunderbolt Port.
This makes more sense than straight ssd. For most people a regular HD is fine. SSD are too expensive for a decent storage size and hard drives come in even greater capacity. So in the end you are paying more for less. And yes I know SSD has great speed benefits but most people can access their documents, music, photos and movies just fine with a hard drive. If you think you need the speed just to boot faster or launch word faster, then make yourself boot up a ten year old computer running OS9 and don't leave the computer until its up and running.
Not with the bandwidth limitations(5-6 devices currently). And anyway the port is small enough to have 6 on the side of my MBP in place of the Display port, Firewire, USB, and Ethernet ports.
Initially, I was really hoping this feature would appear with the new mbp. But I only reboot my mbp (4 years old and needing a refresh!) once a week so the ability to have the OS on flash storage is not really such a big deal for me.
I would assume we will see these in the next iMac updates coming this summer. Makes sense since it's a desktop chip and MacBook pros were just updated anyway.
I know SSD drives can already be added in addition to the regular HD in the current 27" iMacs, but they are large and rather expensive...and not available on the 21.5" models.
Adding this chip as standard across the imac line(even the 21.5") would enable the average person to see the benefit of an SSD with faster boot up times and quicker response while using their favorite programs and the Mac osx.
I guess you'd still be able to add an additional larger ssd drive too like you can now as a BTO option.
Sounds good to me. And then come January of 2012 the MacBook pros will get it too when they get redesigned without an optical drive. Again...just guessing.
I know SSD drives can already be added in addition to the regular HD in the current 27" iMacs, but they are large and rather expensive...and not available on the 21.5" models.
Adding this chip as standard across the imac line(even the 21.5") would enable the average person to see the benefit of an SSD with faster boot up times and quicker response while using their favorite programs and the Mac osx.
I guess you'd still be able to add an additional larger ssd drive too like you can now as a BTO option.
Sounds good to me. And then come January of 2012 the MacBook pros will get it too when they get redesigned without an optical drive. Again...just guessing.
You should see my external FireWire drive array that I have dedicated to just Lightroom catalogs and raw images files from my cameras. Even the local catalog kept on the internal drive is bigger than your 64GB estimate...
As a FireWire user, I can see the advantages of a second TB port, but it'll be a while before the other ports disappear.
cool idea
Per those that say just get a SSD, this would still be beneficial. You could have small (4GB?) super fast SSD's (think almost RAM speeds) using the new caching tech, and have a regular-speed SSD (80GB) for your "regular" data. That would provide the best bang for the buck.
Per those that say just get a SSD, this would still be beneficial. You could have small (4GB?) super fast SSD's (think almost RAM speeds) using the new caching tech, and have a regular-speed SSD (80GB) for your "regular" data. That would provide the best bang for the buck.
I would assume we will see these in the next iMac updates coming this summer. Makes sense since it's a desktop chip and MacBook pros were just updated anyway.
I know SSD drives can already be added in addition to the regular HD in the current 27" iMacs, but they are large and rather expensive...and not available on the 21.5" models.
Adding this chip as standard across the imac line(even the 21.5") would enable the average person to see the benefit of an SSD with faster boot up times and quicker response while using their favorite programs and the Mac osx.
I guess you'd still be able to add an additional larger ssd drive too like you can now as a BTO option.
Sounds good to me. And then come January of 2012 the MacBook pros will get it too when they get redesigned without an optical drive. Again...just guessing.
Yeah I was thinking the same thing too. Damn I was hoping for the iMac refresh to be out a bit sooner.
So with SSD caching, is there a standard size SSD as part of the machine or will users be able to set up their own configuration with whatever size SSD is optimal for their use?
Also, is it really necessary for SSD caching to be handled at the CPU level? Seems like it could be done and show some big improvements on any machine.
Sure, that older implementation may not have helped much, but I don't see why something like this couldn't make a huge difference for many users. This sounds perfect for the work I do - I need the highest possible disk speed, I have a huge amount of data on disk but only a relatively small amount of it needs to be accessed at any given time. This would give me the benefits of SSD while either requiring a much smaller one or saving me a ton of work of specifically sorting through my files and handpicking which should go on the SSD.
I guess it depends how thoroughly you think about it. Of course this isn't going to be a big improvement for all uses, but it has the potential to be huge for some. I'd kill to get ssd caching now.
Which means you're obviously not "most people". For most people, it would be beneficial to have a certain subset of data on SSD but for the giant libraries of photos, music, and movies it does make much more sense to have it on cheaper HD.
Also, is it really necessary for SSD caching to be handled at the CPU level? Seems like it could be done and show some big improvements on any machine.
Sure, that older implementation may not have helped much, but I don't see why something like this couldn't make a huge difference for many users. This sounds perfect for the work I do - I need the highest possible disk speed, I have a huge amount of data on disk but only a relatively small amount of it needs to be accessed at any given time. This would give me the benefits of SSD while either requiring a much smaller one or saving me a ton of work of specifically sorting through my files and handpicking which should go on the SSD.
I guess it depends how thoroughly you think about it. Of course this isn't going to be a big improvement for all uses, but it has the potential to be huge for some. I'd kill to get ssd caching now.
You should see my external FireWire drive array that I have dedicated to just Lightroom catalogs and raw images files from my cameras. Even the local catalog kept on the internal drive is bigger than your 64GB estimate...
Which means you're obviously not "most people". For most people, it would be beneficial to have a certain subset of data on SSD but for the giant libraries of photos, music, and movies it does make much more sense to have it on cheaper HD.
Z86... Sounds like the love child of Zilog and x86
Z68, not Z86
You will have to wait couple of years for thatWell this new Z68 chip would be small, so I guess you could have it, a regular HD and then an additional larger BTO SSD if you want. At least in the iMacs. Currently in the 27" iMacs, you can have both a regular HD and a BTO SSD drive of up to 500gigs I believe. So I assume you could have room for all three if the Z68 chip was Included as standard.
The current 21.5" iMacs don't have a BTO option for an additional SSD drive, but I am sure they have room for this small Z68 ssd chip.
There is also a rumor that a third iMac size will be added, the 24" again. Don't know if it will replace the 21.5" or just be added to the iMac line up....but I am sure like the 27", there'd be room to add the z68, a regular HD and a larger BTO SSD drive if you wanted.
Again....just guessing here. New iMacs should be coming this summer....which falls in time with the Z68 chip being produced in May.
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_2_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8C148 Safari/6533.18.5)
No!
One TB port may be fine for a laptop but but a couple of years down the road and desktops will find the need for more than one port. Laptops may never have that need but that is no surprise.
As to daisy chaining that is only good up to six devices. Even at 10GBits per second you still have the potential to run into congestion on a port. It wouldn't take much for solid state drives to plug the pipes. I see a high potential for multiple ports on desktop machines.
As to Apples plans who knows? One thing that is obvious is that the TB chip is awfully big. This leads me to wonder about the systems structure and unseen capabilities. If the chip is a cross bar of some sort then it likely has some unused ports right now. It is to bad the details are so hard to get.
Newfiebill said:
No!
One TB port may be fine for a laptop but but a couple of years down the road and desktops will find the need for more than one port. Laptops may never have that need but that is no surprise.
As to daisy chaining that is only good up to six devices. Even at 10GBits per second you still have the potential to run into congestion on a port. It wouldn't take much for solid state drives to plug the pipes. I see a high potential for multiple ports on desktop machines.
As to Apples plans who knows? One thing that is obvious is that the TB chip is awfully big. This leads me to wonder about the systems structure and unseen capabilities. If the chip is a cross bar of some sort then it likely has some unused ports right now. It is to bad the details are so hard to get.
Perhaps. I think they may have learned their lesson for offering the 9400M, a couple of years back, in the baseline iMac... for £949.
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_2_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Mobile/8C148a)
So does this work the same way as those seagate hybrid drives? I'm thinking of getting one of those for my mbp; are they worth it?
So does this work the same way as those seagate hybrid drives? I'm thinking of getting one of those for my mbp; are they worth it?
Jarbo - you seem like a nice guy, so I want to help you. The new chipset is a hush hush fix to the flawed chipset with bad sata ports. My brother's friend has a cousin that spoke with her father's girlfriend who works at Intel and learned that the current chipsets (like on the one you ordered) suffer from migrating ionic erosion to the Sandy Bridge CPU. The result will be a slowing of processing speed but not a failure - thus no warranty coverage. You have ordered a dog of a computer unfortunately.
However, I will be happy to buy it from you at 1/2 price so you don't have to live with that piece of junk that will be arriving at your door shortly
Jarbo - you seem like a nice guy, so I want to help you. The new chipset is a hush hush fix to the flawed chipset with bad sata ports. My brother's friend has a cousin that spoke with her father's girlfriend who works at Intel and learned that the current chipsets (like on the one you ordered) suffer from migrating ionic erosion to the Sandy Bridge CPU. The result will be a slowing of processing speed but not a failure - thus no warranty coverage. You have ordered a dog of a computer unfortunately.
However, I will be happy to buy it from you at 1/2 price so you don't have to live with that piece of junk that will be arriving at your door shortly
What a guy
Since youre on a generosity spree...care to take a netbook off my hands for...IDK, half the price of a new MBP?
