Is Intel X25G2 waste for Penryn MBP?

pcconvert

macrumors member
Original poster
Oct 24, 2008
69
0
I bought 160GB X25G2 only to realize (later) that my MBP17 SATA is indeed limited to 1.5Gb so it made me think - shouln'd I utilize this Intel in my i7 iMac and get some cheaper slower SSD for my MBP? If so which one?

Or is the read speed only half of benefits of SSD and the access time and write management being the other part? (I read about some issues with jmicron controllers etc.)

Pls advise. Thanks!
 

Gabriel GR

macrumors 6502a
Jul 12, 2009
716
1
Athens, Greece
I bought 160GB X25G2 only to realize (later) that my MBP17 SATA is indeed limited to 1.5Gb so it made me think - shouln'd I utilize this Intel in my i7 iMac and get some cheaper slower SSD for my MBP? If so which one?

Or is the read speed only half of benefits of SSD and the access time and write management being the other part? (I read about some issues with jmicron controllers etc.)

Pls advise. Thanks!
Storage has been the bottleneck of every system for many years. Both systems will benefit equally from the random read and write speeds which is where the SSD performance boost comes from. So put it there where performance matters the most.
 

Transporteur

macrumors 68030
Nov 30, 2008
2,729
3
UK
The 160 G2 works on the limit of SATA II, which is about 270-280MB/s, so you really don't want to use this drive with SATA I. It's a waste of money.

Put the drive in your iMac and get yourself a decent SSD for you MacBook. 140MB/s is approximately the maximum you can transfer with SATA I, so a SSD within that range would be ideal.
 

pcconvert

macrumors member
Original poster
Oct 24, 2008
69
0
The 160 G2 works on the limit of SATA II, which is about 270-280MB/s, so you really don't want to use this drive with SATA I. It's a waste of money.

Put the drive in your iMac and get yourself a decent SSD for you MacBook. 140MB/s is approximately the maximum you can transfer with SATA I, so a SSD within that range would be ideal.
ok, but which one was my question. So which would be decent SSD without jmicron issues (stuttering I think)?
 

cheapa55

macrumors 6502a
Oct 29, 2007
901
6
I'd like to know as well. I bought the intel G2 and plan to buy a macbook. Are all macbooks limited?
 

vant

macrumors 65816
Jul 1, 2009
1,231
1
The 160 G2 works on the limit of SATA II, which is about 270-280MB/s, so you really don't want to use this drive with SATA I. It's a waste of money.

Put the drive in your iMac and get yourself a decent SSD for you MacBook. 140MB/s is approximately the maximum you can transfer with SATA I, so a SSD within that range would be ideal.
It's not a waste of money. Traditional hard drives cannot max out SATA1.

The OP is trying to find a slower & cheaper drive, but you might experience performance degradation that is not related to SATA1 limits.

My advice is to stick with the X25-M
 

Transporteur

macrumors 68030
Nov 30, 2008
2,729
3
UK
ok, but which one was my question. So which would be decent SSD without jmicron issues (stuttering I think)?
Get one with a Indilinx controller. They are pretty good, too. I've got an OCZ with the Indilinx in my MacBook and it does not have any stutterings whatsoever.

The OCZ Solid 2 series uses the Indilinx controller and offers speeds up to 155MB/s. That drive should be perfect for your MacBook.
Just make sure it is the Solid 2, the first gen Solid uses the JMicron controller.
 

Transporteur

macrumors 68030
Nov 30, 2008
2,729
3
UK
It's not a waste of money. Traditional hard drives cannot max out SATA1.

The OP is trying to find a slower & cheaper drive, but you might experience performance degradation that is not related to SATA1 limits.

My advice is to stick with the X25-M

Sorry, but we're talking Intel SSD, not magnetic hard drives. The Intel SSD max out SATA I by factor 2!
 

vant

macrumors 65816
Jul 1, 2009
1,231
1
Right. But why limiting such a drive and not getting a decent one that fits the drives connection?
Makes no sense to me.
No SSD is intended for SATA1.

If you use an inferior SSD and an Intel X25-M on SATA1, you would still see performance differences between the two.
 

Gabriel GR

macrumors 6502a
Jul 12, 2009
716
1
Athens, Greece
Right. But why limiting such a drive and not getting a decent one that fits the drives connection?
Makes no sense to me.
because solid state drives with speed low enough not to saturate SATA-1 also have much slower random read/write speeds. And the later are the ones that make SSD's feel as fast as they do. SSD's can read at 300MB/s but you don't have anywhere to transfer data TO at that speed (except for your RAM of course).

Anyway, samsung and corsair make some nice small and not very expensive SSD's. But they are nowhere near the X25-M in random read/write speed, IOPS and responsiveness. I wouldn't compromise with anything less.

If speed is not that necessary on your laptop, get a nice big 500gb drive and call it a day. You shouldn't worry about getting the most out of your SSD but whether it will make your computing experience more pleasant than it currently is.
 

Similar threads

Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.