Mid 2009 MBP SSD Speed

[CRAIG1591]

Just upgraded my Mid 2009 15" MBP to an Intel 530 240GB SSD.

With a clean install of Mavericks 10.9.1 (except for TRIM Enabler) I'm only getting a Write Speed of 102.5 MB/s and a Read of 134.1 MB/s with the Black Magic disk speed test.

Is this a normal result for a MBP like mine?
Despite the 3 GB/s SATA connection I was expecting a better result.

 

[p3ntyne]

Just upgraded my Mid 2009 15" MBP to an Intel 530 240GB SSD.

With a clean install of Mavericks 10.9.1 (except for TRIM Enabler) I'm only getting a Write Speed of 102.5 MB/s and a Read of 134.1 MB/s with the Black Magic disk speed test.

Is this a normal result for a MBP like mine?
Despite the 3 GB/s SATA connection I was expecting a better result.

No that is not normal, you should be getting speed of around 250 mb/s each.

When you go to About This Mac/ More Info/ System Profiler/ SATA and then click the intel drive, what does it say for link speed and negotiated link speed? It could be running at 1.5 Gigabits for some reason...

 

[CRAIG1591]

No that is not normal, you should be getting speed of around 250 mb/s each.

When you go to About This Mac/ More Info/ System Profiler/ SATA and then click the intel drive, what does it say for link speed and negotiated link speed? It could be running at 1.5 Gigabits for some reason...

Link Speed: 3 Gigabit
Negotiated Link Speed: 1.5 Gigabit

How do I fix this?

 

[Altemose]

Try resetting the PRAM and SMC. Also verify that there are no firmware upgrades (EFI) available for the MacBook through Software Update.

 

[CRAIG1591]

Try resetting the PRAM and SMC. Also verify that there are no firmware upgrades (EFI) available for the MacBook through Software Update.

Reset PRAM, SMC and no updates are available.
Still listed as;
Link Speed: 3 Gigabit
Negotiated Link Speed: 1.5 Gigabit

 

[ElectronGuru]

Could be a bug:
http://www.ocztechnologyforum.com/f...ted-Link-Speed-at-1-5-Gb-MacBook-Pro-Mid-2009

Or an issue with the cable, etc:
http://www.tomshardware.com/answers/id-1711511/link-speed-negotiated-link-speed.html

 

[Altemose]

Then I think ElectronGurus theory is going to be right.

 

[p3ntyne]

I agree, it is probably a bug although it could be something to do with the SSD - I know some 6G SSD's will only run at 1.5G's on 3G computers. I'd probably send it back...

 

[BrettApple]

Most Late 2008 - Mid 2009 Mac's using the Nvidia controller have this issue. It's most SATA 3 drives, they like to only operate at SATA 1. It's really just a hit or a miss. I had a kingston SSD working at SATA 2 one day, and SATA 1 the next.

Your best bet is to use a SATA 2 SSD, such as OWC's Murcury 3G. I had it in the optical bay of my Late '08 MB and now my 2010. Always runs at SATA 2. It's around 230-250 MB/s consistently. Otherwise, the speed difference is mostly realized with long file transfers. As far as usability goes and general use, you may not notice a big difference.

I had an '07 MBP with an SSD running at SATA 1, and it wasn't much different from the load times on my '08 or 2010 with SATA 2. But if you can return the drive and get an OWC one, I'd go for it.

 

[stonewall777]

I had this issue come up for me. On a MBP 15 mid 2009,
I installed a 256GB SSD and then tried to install OS X
10.9.1 Mavericks. It was painfully slow during the
installation, but I hung in to see how it would turn out.
On the first boot up try it was taking forever, over 10
minutes, so I gave up on it.

I didn't check the system report sata/sata express.

I began experimenting with this SSD, using it in an
external enclosure, and it seemed normal speed.

Using a late 2011 MBP, I installed the SSD and then
installed OS X 10.9 again, after erasing the drive first.

I checked the read/write speeds on this newer computer
and it was very fast, I didn't record the speeds.

Eventually, I removed this SSD and then tried it again
on the original mid 2009 MBP 15, using the OS X installation
from the newer MBP. Checking the system
report, it was showing link speed 3GB and negotiated 3GB.

So far so good. I then checked speed using BlackMagic and had
read 190, write 257. Much, much better than before.

I also enabled the TRIM, and this seemed to speed up the
boot up, it went from 1:30 to 0:51.
But the Black Magic read/write speeds didn't change.

After a pram reset bootup speed was 18 seconds. Very nice!


This SSD is empty except for Mavericks, BlackMagic, and
iStat widget.

FWIW

 

[MarvinHC]

Most Late 2008 - Mid 2009 Mac's using the Nvidia controller have this issue. It's most SATA 3 drives, they like to only operate at SATA 1. It's really just a hit or a miss. I had a kingston SSD working at SATA 2 one day, and SATA 1 the next.

Your best bet is to use a SATA 2 SSD, such as OWC's Murcury 3G. I had it in the optical bay of my Late '08 MB and now my 2010. Always runs at SATA 2. It's around 230-250 MB/s consistently. Otherwise, the speed difference is mostly realized with long file transfers. As far as usability goes and general use, you may not notice a big difference.

I had an '07 MBP with an SSD running at SATA 1, and it wasn't much different from the load times on my '08 or 2010 with SATA 2. But if you can return the drive and get an OWC one, I'd go for it.

I am just about to update my late 2008 MBP with and SSD and i have the Nvidia MVP79 controller. Does the issue that it goes down to SATA 1 instead of 2 appear with all makes of SSDs or are some more suitable than others? I am currently hesitant between the Crucial M500 and the Samsung Evo 840, so if either of them is guaranteed to work on SATA 2 I have a winner

 

[BrettApple]

I am just about to update my late 2008 MBP with and SSD and i have the Nvidia MVP79 controller. Does the issue that it goes down to SATA 1 instead of 2 appear with all makes of SSDs or are some more suitable than others? I am currently hesitant between the Crucial M500 and the Samsung Evo 840, so if either of them is guaranteed to work on SATA 2 I have a winner

I think I've heard it is more common with the SandForce controllers than anything else. Which is what my Kingston has. The OWC uses it too, but it's an actual SATA II drive. Samsung and Crucial each have their own different controllers (MEX and a Marvell one). So it may work. But it seems kind of hit and miss. Something to do with how it handles backwards compatibility. I've heard some SATA 3 drives won't work with the G5 Macs at all where others do, having issues going to SATA 1.

So, your milage may vary. But you can give it a shot, or find a SATA 2 drive.

 

[MarvinHC]

I think I've heard it is more common with the SandForce controllers than anything else. Which is what my Kingston has. The OWC uses it too, but it's an actual SATA II drive. Samsung and Crucial each have their own different controllers (MEX and a Marvell one). So it may work. But it seems kind of hit and miss. Something to do with how it handles backwards compatibility. I've heard some SATA 3 drives won't work with the G5 Macs at all where others do, having issues going to SATA 1.

So, your milage may vary. But you can give it a shot, or find a SATA 2 drive.

Thanks Brett. I actually just came across a seller who offers the Toshiba SSDs that were (or still are?) put into the MacBooks by Apple. The seller says it's a SATA 2 and from what I could gather in the forums this is what was put in by Apple in 2010 in the MPROs. I could get a 512 GB for about 200 US$. I am hesitant because I guess it is somewhat 'yesterday's technology'. But the price would be great (is is supposedly brand new, probably old stock)

This is the drive I am talking about:

Toshiba THNS512GG8BBAA

http://www.toshiba.com/taec/news/press_releases/2008/memy_08_550.jsp

 

[BrettApple]

Hmm, the price as far as dollar per gig is great. But do they offer any sort of warranty? That's what I'd be concerned with. Especially if it's an older controller. It is at least MLC NAND though.

Seems like a toss up. For $180 you can get a 240GB OWC 3G drive with a 3 year warranty, or a little more and it's 512GB but older. If they at least offer some sort of warranty, then it may be worth it. At least it would run at full speed.

 

[aau]

Believe its a some kind of incompatibility between Nvidia MCP79 Sata controller used in the older MBPs and the SandForce SF-2281 used in many SSDs. Problem appeared in my Early 2009 MBP when ADATA SP900 (SandForce SF-2281) was installed. After changing to OCZ Agility 4 (Indilinx) and Samsung 840 Pro now negotiated link speed is full 3 Gigabit.

 

[BrettApple]

Believe its a some kind of incompatibility between Nvidia MCP79 Sata controller used in the older MBPs and the SandForce SF-2281 used in many SSDs. Problem appeared in my Early 2009 MBP when ADATA SP900 (SandForce SF-2281) was installed. After changing to OCZ Agility 4 (Indilinx) and Samsung 840 Pro now negotiated link speed is full 3 Gigabit.

That's it! I remember reading about it but had forgotten the specifics. I know my Kingston has it, I think intel, OCZ, Mushkin, Adata, Corsair, and others have used it in their stuff at one point or another. I think my Agility 3 may have it too, but it's on an 07 iMac with an intel chipset running sata 2.

 

[Manolhs]

Finally I make it work!!!