Power Mac G5 Compatible 1 TB SSD

[mac57mac57]

I am looking for a 1 or 2 TB SSD that will boot in my G5 Quad. Most SSDs you can buy these days are SATA III. The Quad is SATA I. MOST SSDs will "downshift" to SATA I, but not all.

Can anyone who is using one recommend a good G5-compatible 1 or 2 TB SSD?

Thanks!

 

[ToniCH]

Do you really need a TB sized boot drive? Install OS and apps to smaller drive which you know is compatible. Then install the big drive for other stuff. That way you can utilize 2 Sata buses. Or you can even install a PCIe sata card which might be faster than the internal sata bus.

If you get the OWC Accelsior S card it supports also up to sata III drives. And if you want you can transfer your user older to it too. And also disk intensive applications.

 

[eyoungren]

I can speculate on two brands and know for a fact that one brand works in my 17" PM G4.

The brand that works is Zheino, but the problem with them is that they seem to have exited the market entirely.

Samsung EVOs have been mentioned to be working here a few times. Not sure exactly which models. And I've used Silicon Power, but that's only on my MacPro. I feel though they may work on PowerPC.

That's all I got.

 

[MarkC426]

Is this any help
There is a list of ‘known to work’ also.

https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/list-of-sata-ssds-known-not-to-work-in-imac-g5s-and-power-mac-g5s.2375683/

 

[Doq]

I swear by the Kingston A400 for my SATA SSDs. Technically they top out at 960GB, not 1TB, but I'd call that Close Enough.

My G5 has a 480GB unit installed (that's where Adelie Linux lives), but there's no reason why the 960GB wouldn't work.

 

[mac57mac57]

Do you really need a TB sized boot drive?

Perhaps not, but I want to partition it into TWO boot volumes, one for Sorbet Leopard and one for Tiger. That is 500 GB each.

I do also want both partitions to be big enough to hold all of the apps for each OS. This dramatically decreases app load time. Now admittedly, a 500 GB drive positioned into two 256 GB partitions would almost certainly work, but 500 GB partitions turns that "almost certainly" into "definitely".

In the end, this is not about " need", it is about " want". Yesterday I booted my G4 Sawtooth into Tiger, forgetting that it was on an SSD. It was SO fast, even on a G4! That got me thinking about doing this on my Quad. Imagine how fast THAT would be! I want that!

 

[ToniCH]

Perhaps not, but I want to partition it into TWO boot volumes, one for Sorbet Leopard and one for Tiger. That is 500 GB each.

I do also want both partitions to be big enough to hold all of the apps for each OS. This dramatically decreases app load time. Now admittedly, a 500 GB drive positioned into two 256 GB partitions would almost certainly work, but 500 GB partitions turns that "almost certainly" into "definitely".

In the end, this is not about " need", it is about " want". Yesterday I booted my G4 Sawtooth into Tiger, forgetting that it was on an SSD. It was SO fast, even on a G4! That got me thinking about doing this on my Quad. Imagine how fast THAT would be! I want that!

Ok, I understand you want speed/performance. 👍 Substitute the word I used "need" with your word "want" and re-read, then think. What I am suggesting uses 2 SATA I-buses (faster than 1) or 1 SATA I -bus and via a PCIe a SATA III-bus (even faster option). All this while avoiding possible compatibility issues making things simpler. And obviously you can partition the boot drive like you plan and apps and docs can be installed to any drive - even to that SATA III SSD connected to the 40€ PCIe card.

Imagine how fast THAT would be!

I don't need to imagine it, I know how fast it is vs the spinner and how slow it is vs for example the PCIe-option - I've tried most combos with my G5s. I am just offering options I have found good by trying them myself. Some food for thought for you while planning for upgrades.

But, all of the above is faster than the original spinner, including one big drive connected to one SATA I bus like you plan. In the end choice is of course yours.


Here are some comparisons I made earlier.

Pic 1: Spinner vs cheap mSata SSD vs expensive 1TB OWC SATA III SSD in the internal bus. Yes, much faster than the spinner but notice how the SSDs are bus restricted and basically equal (and slow vs how we think SSDs should perform).

Pic 2: same mSata SSD in internal SATA -bus, different benchmark. Compare to pic 3.
Pic 3: 1TB OWC SATA III drive in a OWC Accelsior S PCIe -card. Compare to pic 2. Notice the difference between the 2 SSDs? They were equal when connected to the internal bus (pic 1). Still not 100% of what the drive can do (in a modern machine) but totally transforms G5 disk performance for around 40€.

 

[mac57mac57]

Thanks @ToniCH! Excellent information, and presented in a compelling way. I am sold!

There are a variety of different speeds for each PCIe slot: 4x, 8x, 16x. What slot/speed was the Excelsior card in for the test that provided the output in your Figure 3?

 

[ToniCH]

Thanks @ToniCH! Excellent information, and presented in a compelling way. I am sold!

There are a variety of different speeds for each PCIe slot: 4x, 8x, 16x. What slot/speed was the Excelsior card in for the test that provided the output in your Figure 3?

I put it into the next available slot beside the GPU (with FX 4500 I suspect that would be the 8x slot?). I believe the SATA III SSDs might be PCIe -bus restricted also as I think the drive itself performed even better when plugged to more modern Mac.

What other PCIe cards do you have or plan to use? Is any of them more demanding than the GPU and/or SSD card? If not then logical installation order to fastest slots at this point is GPU, Accelsior S, anything else.

 

[mac57mac57]

Thanks again @ToniCH.

BTW, can you confirm that the combination of an Excelsior S PCIe card plus an OWC Mercury Electra 6G SSD is bootable by a Power Mac G5?

 

[ToniCH]

BTW, can you confirm that the combination of an Excelsior S PCIe card plus an OWC Mercury Electra 6G SSD is bootable by a Power Mac G5?

No, I cannot confirm that nor have I implied it would. I probably tried it but cannot remember, I doubt it. My suggestion was: boot drive to SATA I bus, other stuff to the SATA III drive on the card.

I can only recommend the card. I have no comments about the OWC Electra 6G. It has worked fine in my use but I remember seeing some complaints about OWC drives on line. And they are expensive (I bought mine as one component in a bigger batch or parts so I paid very little for it). Personally if I was buying a SSD drive now I would opt for some of the real SSD brands.

Ps. OWC doesn't list G5 or 10.4 or 10.5 compatible with Accelsior S but I have run it in G5 with 10.5.8 & 9 with no problems at all. So, recheck that it works with 10.4 if you need it.

 

[mac57mac57]

Thanks again @ToniCH - that puts a different light on things. I think I am back to getting a "standard" SSD and using it as a boot volume. It should be quite a bit faster than the current spinner.

I could split it as you suggest, but that is more work than I feel the result would justify.

 

[Matias_]

Do you really need a TB sized boot drive?

The Power Mac G5 only has two 2.5" drive bays which I've personally found very limiting compared to the MDD's 4 since I want to run a lot of different operating systems (and I sadly don't own any firewire disks). And there are no bootable PCIe SATA cards for the late 2005 G5 afaik.

So I can definitely understand the need for a need for a big boot drive in a G5 to divide into several smaller partitions for different operating systems

 

[JackAHyde]

I'm late on this, but I already got myself a Crucial 1TB drive off Amazon for not that much a month ago for the G5. After installing Sorbet on it and starting fresh with it, I would say it was worth it. It worked perfectly fine and I didn't notice anything amiss in terms of performance.

If anything, the only difficult part was actually taking the drive caddies out of the system. My fingers hurt just thinking about it because I was an unlucky soul who got a G5 on eBay only to have it arrive with some damage during shipping.

 

[ToniCH]

Thanks again @ToniCH - that puts a different light on things. I think I am back to getting a "standard" SSD and using it as a boot volume. It should be quite a bit faster than the current spinner.

I could split it as you suggest, but that is more work than I feel the result would justify.

Yes it will be. It is just not the fastest solution for the fastest PPC Mac on the planet. But, like I said it's your choice and your priorities.

My Accelsior S is nowadays in my cMP 5.1. Now, with fresh talk about this and due my plans to finish the Quad LCS rebuild soon I'll be getting another card to put into the Quad. There is nothing in terms of work that takes more than few minutes, so big improvement with little effort IMHO.

I'm late on this, but I already got myself a Crucial 1TB drive off Amazon for not that much a month ago for the G5. After installing Sorbet on it and starting fresh with it, I would say it was worth it. It worked perfectly fine and I didn't notice anything amiss in terms of performance.

If anything, the only difficult part was actually taking the drive caddies out of the system. My fingers hurt just thinking about it because I was an unlucky soul who got a G5 on eBay only to have it arrive with some damage during shipping.

Yes, a SSD is almost always worth it.

The drives can be super tight even with a good case. It is not the most perfect solution from the factory.

 

[mac57mac57]

I am beginning to wonder if an SSD will impact my Air Quad's performance much.

Right now, my Quad has a new WD Blue WD20EXBX 2 TB spinner featuring a whopping 256 MB of onboard cache. Per QuickBench 4.0, this drive is delivering 132 MB/s for all read/write types tested. The theoretical maximum of the Quad's SATA I interface is 1.5 Gbps, or 150 MB/s. At 130 MB/s already, I am already so close to the maximum the machine can deliver that an SSD may not produce much observable difference in disk performance.

The only upside I can think of is that the 130 MB/s happens at 1 KB transfer sizes and above. Smaller transfer sizes produce lower speeds. Perhaps an SSD runs a flat level transfer rate irrespective of the transfer size? Else, an SSD would not be a productive investment.

Thoughts?

 

[ToniCH]

Disk performance is not all about transfer speed. Also search speeds matter. With spinner the platters must physically turn and heads find the correct spot to be able to start read or write. With SSD I believe the access is direct and pretty much instantaneous. When this happens hundreds of times per second you can feel it.

About transfer speeds: there is only so much you can do with SATA I before you hit a wall. That is why people have tried to find better ways like eSATA and SATA III PCIe-cards.

 

[M.Brane]

Yeah funny how people rarely think about latency, power consumption, heat, noise etc. Lots of advantages to using an SSD in an older Mac.

 

[ToniCH]

Yes, true. There are many things in favor of SSDs I didn't even think right now but you did! 👍

Ps. go PowerComputing! I should have a T-shirt with that logo somewhere. 🥰

 

[mac57mac57]

Well, let's see ...

... around 1:00 PM today I ordered a Kingston A400 SSD, 960 GB, from Amazon ... effectively 1 TB ... based on @Doq's positive report about the same in G5s.

By 4:35 PM today it has been delivered. Wow! 3.5 hours from order to delivery! That is amazing. I am impressed. All the hype is finally starting to come true!

It may be a day or two before I can install it, but I will report back when I do.

 

[mac57mac57]

Today, I installed a new Kingston A400 960 GB SSD into my Air Quad and was relieved when it was detected by Mac OS X Sorbet Leopard. Thanks to @Doq for the recommendation of the A400 family of Kingston SSDs.

I partitioned the new Kingston A400 into two equal partitions, one for Sorbet and one for Tiger. I used Carbon Copy Cloner to clone my booting Sorbet install onto the new A400 Sorbet partition and it completed successfully. System Preference shows that it is bootable, but that is as far as I can get today. More testing tomorrow when I have more time!

Tomorrow I also hope to undertake a "two step" clone of the Tiger install that used to be on my first Quad but was then moved to my G4 Sawtooth. I will clone it onto an external hard drive, and then clone THAT onto the Tiger partition I have created on the A400.

 

[mac57mac57]

Well, I was sort of right and sort of wrong about the possible performance gains of an SSD vs. the Western Digital Blue WD20EZBX 1 TB spinner in my late 2005 Power Mac G5 Quad.

Boot times are not materially changed, and app loading times are a mixed bag:

MS-Word was actually SLOWER to start up from the SSD than from the spinner! I have no thoughts to explain that except to say that Microsoft has always seemed to "dumb down and slow down" the Mac versions of MS-Office up until recently.

Overall, the best I can say is about a 30% decrease in app load time for some apps, but not all.

Surprising (and disappointing) result, but the SSD will stay in place and will soon host a Tiger install as well.

 

[NikolaPPC]

The SSD that also work and is probably one of the best for a PowerPC is Samsung Evo 840 (or Pro). Why that exact model? Because it has hardware TRIM support and lots of other "fancy" stuff.
Samsung SSD's have cache memory (around 500MB for 500GB i think..1GB for 1TB etc..).
Also, Samsung has a technology (i can't remember what it's called, i can check it up later) where when you write to an SSD, for the first few GBs it behaves like SLC instead of a TLC for evo or DLC for Pro models.

Here is a link for SLC, DLC and TLC info:

Multi-level cell - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

Kingston A400 doesn't have cache nor that samsung fancy technology..so you get an idea why it behaves similarly to an WD HDD (the HDD has 256MB cache compared to none on the SSD)..

Hope i helped you somehow 😅

 

[MarkC426]

The SSD that also work and is probably one of the best for a PowerPC is Samsung Evo 840 (or Pro). Why that exact model? Because it has hardware TRIM support and lots of other "fancy" stuff.
Samsung SSD's have cache memory (around 500MB for 500GB i think..1GB for 1TB etc..).
Also, Samsung has a technology (i can't remember what it's called, i can check it up later) where when you write to an SSD, for the first few GBs it behaves like SLC instead of a TLC for evo or DLC for Pro models.

Here is a link for SLC, DLC and TLC info:

Multi-level cell - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

Kingston A400 doesn't have cache nor that samsung fancy technology..so you get an idea why it behaves similarly to an WD HDD (the HDD has 256MB cache compared to none on the SSD)..

Hope i helped you somehow 😅

That’s interesting, I will have to try it.
My cMP has all Samsung Evo’s 840/850/860, I swore by them.

I am sure I have an old 840 sitting around somewhere….

 

[NikolaPPC]

That’s interesting, I will have to try it.
My cMP has all Samsung Evo’s 840/850/860, I swore by them.

I am sure I have an old 840 sitting around somewhere….

As far as i know, only 840 series has hardware TRIM, the newer models only have software TRIM if the OS supports it natively..

Have fun testing everything out!

I have 840, 850, 860, 870 series, they are pretty good SSDs, i only use Samsung SSD when i buy new ones, few bucks more (comparing to others), but the benefits are in the long run..
I have never seen Samsung SSDs fail (i help out in 2 computer repair shops with electronics), compared to Patriot, Kingston etc...A400 have a really high fail rates, i have personally changed like 7-8 of them because they failed completely (the fail rate is about 30%). As for Patriot, they had a notorious series (can't remember what series exactly, but it was a 2.5 model, not the M.2), out of 300-400 SSDs the computer shops sold, around 80% of them failed, Patriot made a recall for all of them and returned money.