Reviving older Macbook pro

comda

macrumors 6502a
Original poster
Mar 15, 2011
599
68
MODS: if you think this doesnt belong in this category, let me know. I prefer to post issues with older Macs even intel macs as these guys here are Pros at keeping older machines going. Unless there is an older intel page.

As some of you may know i got my hands on a 2009 Macbook Pro 5,5. Currently its chipset is rather ticking me off. I have it loaded up with 4Gb of Ram and a 240GB kingston 300V SSD.

The issue is the SSD is being bottlenecked. BADLY. it ran faster in my Macbook 3,1 from 07 with the intel chipset. Here its being kept at just over 100mb read and write thanks to Nvidias MCP79 AHCI Chipset. Thanks Nvidia.. -_- its running on SATA1 as Lightbulbfun confirmed and it kinda sucks. i now use this as my main school machine and i can tell its an improvement over my 3,1 as to software compatibility but office doesnt take a second like it did on the 3,1. Everything still a tad slow. Does anyone have a solution to get this SSD running at a faster speed, or should i just save up for a late 2012 Macbook pro 13'3 and dump it in there?
 

keysofanxiety

macrumors G3
Nov 23, 2011
9,537
25,262
I had the same problem in a thread I posted, though it was on a 2008 Aluminium MacBook (though similar chipset I believe). SATA interface was being bottled to 1.5GB/s even though it could apparently run at 3GB/s. It transpired that ... well, that's the way it is unfortunately, nothing we can do to even clock it up to 3GB/s. No firmware hacks or anything like that. :(

But if you find a fix ... please quote this/PM me and let me know :(
 

redheeler

macrumors 604
Oct 17, 2014
7,631
7,364
The issue is the SSD is being bottlenecked. BADLY. it ran faster in my Macbook 3,1 from 07 with the intel chipset. Here its being kept at just over 100mb read and write thanks to Nvidias MCP79 AHCI Chipset. Thanks Nvidia.. -_- its running on SATA1 as Lightbulbfun confirmed and it kinda sucks.
Interesting. My late 2008 MacBook Air with Nvidia MCP79 AHCI scores better than that (about 200 MB/s read, 170 MB/s write). Curious as to what the difference is.
 

128keaton

macrumors 68020
Jan 13, 2013
2,029
413
Interesting. My late 2008 MacBook Air with Nvidia MCP79 AHCI scores better than that (about 200 MB/s read, 170 MB/s write). Curious as to what the difference is.
Are you sure that the drive is connected to the AHCI interface?
OP, maybe try using some sort of CD/DVD - > HDD adaptor?
 

comda

macrumors 6502a
Original poster
Mar 15, 2011
599
68
Are you sure that the drive is connected to the AHCI interface?
OP, maybe try using some sort of CD/DVD - > HDD adaptor?
Mine is a pro so it does have a DVD drive, but i need it. And its connected to the same interface the standard HDD was connected to..
 

comda

macrumors 6502a
Original poster
Mar 15, 2011
599
68
Last edited:

BrettApple

macrumors 65816
Apr 3, 2010
1,099
377
Heart of the midwest
Beat me to it. It's an issue with some Sandforce controllers and the MCP79. The ones that are 6G will drop to 1.5G because of a compatibility issue.

Something like a Crucial drive (MX100/200, BX100, M500 etc.) all work just fine at 3G speeds. I've got them in some 2009 MBPs and they run around 280 MB/s tops which is pretty good. That's what my old OWC 3G SSD would do in my late '08 MacBook. Also Samsung 840/850, and even the cheap SanDisk drives will work at full 3G speeds.

The worst offenders are the Kingston V300 drives. However, sometimes it'll work. I have one case of a V300 in my old 2008 MacBook that is actually running at 3G speeds where it didn't in the past. No idea why, but most of the time they will only run at 1.5 like you've noticed.
 

MagicBoy

macrumors 68040
May 28, 2006
3,888
901
Manchester, UK
The current Kingstons are just ****. They've got a good reputation based on past glories - the early V300 drives were Intel clones. Then they started sticking any old NAND and controller in them, so you've no idea what spec you are actually getting.
 

comda

macrumors 6502a
Original poster
Mar 15, 2011
599
68
well sadly im running the Kingston V300 currently, 240GB. aint got the budget for anything else so its staying in the macbook.
 

comda

macrumors 6502a
Original poster
Mar 15, 2011
599
68
As long as staying at this speed with the kingston isnt damaging it.
 

MultiFinder17

macrumors 68020
Jan 8, 2008
2,139
867
Tampa, Florida
The SSD running at a lower speed isn't hurting the machine at all. The only issue that it has is the less-than-optimal speed, which you seem alright with for the time being. Just think - at least it's faster than a spinning disk :)
 

WalnutSpice

Suspended
Jun 21, 2015
456
91
Canton, Oh
I personally believe this PowerPC forum should be changed from only PowerPC to PowerPC and Early Intel (2006-2007, maybe '08). I think this because most people on the Intel side just won't help at all if you have an older Intel Mac, or tell you to buy a new one.
I expired that trying to get some help with my Early 2009 White MacBook.
 

comda

macrumors 6502a
Original poster
Mar 15, 2011
599
68
I personally believe this PowerPC forum should be changed from only PowerPC to PowerPC and Early Intel (2006-2007, maybe '08). I think this because most people on the Intel side just won't help at all if you have an older Intel Mac, or tell you to buy a new one.
I expired that trying to get some help with my Early 2009 White MacBook.
I completely agree with you! Hence why the MOD note. Everyone over there will just simply tell you to purchase a new one or a refurb versus these guys here know how to make an ancient machine still work, so a vintage one shouldnt be an issue.
 

comda

macrumors 6502a
Original poster
Mar 15, 2011
599
68
Anyways. aside from bootup time and a slight speed increase on certain apps im really debating if i should drop a new battery in this or go and find a late 2012 13'3 macbook....
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.