So the new MacBook Pro's use the faulty SATA II ports for the OptBay Drive. What Now?

Discussion in 'MacBook Pro' started by hamzab, Mar 1, 2011.

  1. hamzab macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2008
    #1
    So it's my understanding that it's been ascertained that the new MacBook Pro's do indeed use the faulty SATA II ports to connect the Optical Bay Drive.

    What effect will this have on the long term performance of the MacBook pro's? It was my understanding that Intel agreed to ship out these chipsets on the basis that manufacturer's such as Apple, IBM etc, did not use the SATA II ports but instead used the SATA III ports.

    Or, could it be that Apple in fact have the new fixed version of the chipset/motherboard and that the SATA II ports are fine? But how could Apple do this in such a short period of time? Here in the UK, If Apple do indeed ship out a product that was faulty from the onset then I think they are liable for it's repair up to 5 years after the initial manufacture date.
     
  2. KJmoon117 macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2007
    Location:
    NC
    #2
    The new MBPs do not use the faulty Cougar Point chips. I have no idea how it was fixed so quickly but there is a MacWorld article that quoted someone high up in Apple that the issue has been fixed.
     
  3. idea_hamster macrumors 65816

    idea_hamster

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2003
    Location:
    NYC, or thereabouts
    #3
    This is the case. There won't be any performance loss over time.

    But it completely ruins any thoughts of 2 x SATA III SSD RAID 0 -- which, frankly would have been a thing of beauty.

    The real question is why would they do this?
     
  4. Kalach macrumors member

    Kalach

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2011
    #4
    I was hoping for SATA 3 support, but no go... :(
     
  5. alent1234 macrumors 603

    Joined:
    Jun 19, 2009
    #5
    supposedly they do use the faulty chips, but they use the ports that didn't have a problem. only a few ports had a problem
     
  6. KJmoon117 macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2007
    Location:
    NC
    #6
    Ports 2-5 have the problem yet the optical drive is in port 2... Intel made manufacturers sign a contract that they will not use those ports if they use the faulty chips.

    For a second I was hoping that the MBP uses the faulty chips because then they would have to use Port 0-1, both which are SATA IIIs
     
  7. Tamasi macrumors member

    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2010
    #7
    Do SSDs made for SATAIII work on SATAII ports? And if the answer is yes, will the performance be equal to a similar SSD, made for SATAII, running on SATAII?

    Thing is, I ordered a BTO model with 128gb SSD from Apple, and would like to get a new SATAIII SSD, connect it to the SATAIII port, and move the original Apple SSD to the optibay. The question is; would that work, and most importantly, would the performance of the 128gb Apple SSD drop?
     
  8. Manacit macrumors member

    Manacit

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2011
    Location:
    New York, NY
    #8


    That will work just fine, and the performance won't drop. Most SSDs can't saturate a SATAIII link, certainly not the SSD that comes with the laptop.

    It's my understanding the the MBPs aren't using the faulty CP chips, so the degradation over time won't happen, so no worries there.
     
  9. idea_hamster macrumors 65816

    idea_hamster

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2003
    Location:
    NYC, or thereabouts
    #9
    Your plan should be fine.

    The Apple SSD is, itself, SATA II so you won't see any performance drop by moving it to an OptiBay.

    When you add an SATA III drive into the original bay, you should see all the gains from your new drive, too. And if, for some reason, you need to put the SATA III drive in the OptiBay, it should work fine, but at the lower 3 Gb/s connection speed.

    EDIT: 2 slo!
     
  10. MrX8503 macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Sep 19, 2010
    #10
    AFAIK, the only SATA III capable drives are c300, vertex 3, and intel 510. These drives are faster than the SATA II spec so if you put these drives in the optibay you'll lose performance.

    The Apple SSDs won't lose performance in a SATA II port because it's not able to outpace a SATA II connection, so you don't have to worry there.

    The problem with Apple not going SATA III on the optibay is that you won't be able to use the next gen SSDs to it's full potential in the optibay.
     
  11. Guy Mancuso macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2009
    #11
    Exactly. Here is most likely Apples reasoning behind using a Sata II in the optical bay is because they do not support anything but a Optical Bay DVD drive which will never even get to Sata II speeds anyway. Also a Sata III connector may actually cost more. The other issue is Apple support . They simply don't want to be responsible for us clever little ***** to actually take advantage of something it was not designed for. I'm one of those little ***** although I am pretty dang old and not little. LOL

    But if they let us do the Optical bay in any legal way within there warranty than they are responsible for Johnny's 3rd party SSD drive blowing up. Honestly we are doing this outside the box and anything that is under Apples control than they have are responsible for it. We are on our own here and anything we do, we will certainly eat the cost because it is not under warranty. Yes it does suck since i a running Raid 0 with two Sata II SSD drives. Now what do i do sell one and get a Sata III. See it just cost me more money and i am responsible for that decision not Apple.

    Think of it this way you buy a car with a certain engine it from Ford . Do you really expect Ford to warranty that engine if you go to your local speed shop and bore it out for more horsepower. If you think so than good luck trying to convince them of that one.

    Not to mention there certainly can be some technical reasons as well. Not so sure we can sit here and point fingers at Apple and say bad boy. They will always protect themselves just like any other company on warranty issues and such.
     
  12. TheHoff macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2008
    #12
    While it certainly sucks to have it on port 2 instead of port 1, in the real world you probably won't even lose that much apparent performance. Sustained Read is like the GeekBench of drive benchmarking. The high numbers sound great but they don't mean much.

    Random read is where it is at. So while the SSD in the optibay might be able to saturate the SATA II, most of the time, it doesn't need to. You'll still get the improved random read speed from the newer drives.
     
  13. Pressure, Mar 1, 2011
    Last edited: Mar 1, 2011

    Pressure macrumors 68040

    Pressure

    Joined:
    May 30, 2006
    Location:
    Denmark
    #13
    Isn't this a fart in a glass of water?

    I doubt Apple is using any faulty parts willingly, especially after the nVIDIA Geforce 8600GT disaster.
     
  14. idea_hamster macrumors 65816

    idea_hamster

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2003
    Location:
    NYC, or thereabouts
    #14
    This is not true. Just like you say that Ford isn't responsible if I bore out my engine, Apple isn't responsible for any aftermarket changes.

    The issue is that unlike Ford, Apple has designed the MBP in a way to destroy our ability to "bore it out."

    Also, I don't believe the cost point. The only possible cost issue was making the connection to a different part of the logic board -- I'm sure that would have bankrupted all of us! :rolleyes:

    And as for "technical" issues -- well, I'd like to hear of even one.
     
  15. KJmoon117 macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2007
    Location:
    NC
    #15
    Have you thought about emailing Mr. Jobs? I'm not sure if he would know but maybe he might respond? Kind of ridiculous but worth a try haha.
     
  16. idea_hamster macrumors 65816

    idea_hamster

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2003
    Location:
    NYC, or thereabouts
    #16
    No: in the real world you probably won't even lose that much apparent performance.

    If I want to composite three HD streams, then yes, 2 x SATA III SSD RAID 0 will help.

    And the whole point is WHY? Why preclude that performance? Your point is that it's rarely used so therefore Apple is right to destroy the capability? When they could simply have used a SATA III port? Why do that?
     
  17. TheHoff macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2008
    #17
    I'm with you and I agree. Apple screwed the pooch for people who wanted RAID 0.

    For most of the hobbyists here, though, who simply want to have the fastest (that includes me), it won't be very apparent in actual use.
     
  18. idea_hamster macrumors 65816

    idea_hamster

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2003
    Location:
    NYC, or thereabouts
    #18
    Honestly, I did consider it -- and last night I wrote and deleted about 4 different drafts.

    I didn't think that any of them were appropriate. Right now I'm just too furious to interact with him and even if I got one of his typically terse replies, I think I would take it as smug and dismissive, just making my own feelings on this issue worse.

    I did, however, email Anand, informing him of this. I'm hoping that someone at Apple will take his telephone call....
     
  19. Tyrion macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2002
    #19
    Because they're lazy and there's no point for them to enable or use SATA-III for the ODD. Think about it: even if the ODD uses a SATA-III port, it might have required Apple to rewrite some firmware or to change some tiny minuscule detail in the MBP's assembly. Why would they do that? As far as they're concerned, the only thing that ever goes into that part of an MBP is a slow, crappy optical drive that will never ever saturate even SATA-II ports - so no need to change or rewrite or even do anything at all.

    EDIT: I do share your outrage at the lack of choice, though. I really, really don't want an optical drive and I would have gladly shelled out whatever ridiculous amount Apple would charge for two HDDs or two SSDs in the MBP.
     
  20. yozh macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2008
    #20
    I have to take a look but the Hard Drive is on SATA 6Gb port in MBP 13. When I get home I have to take a look at the DVD drive but I could of swore it said 6Gb negotiated at 3 for the DVD as well
     
  21. idea_hamster, Mar 1, 2011
    Last edited: Mar 1, 2011

    idea_hamster macrumors 65816

    idea_hamster

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2003
    Location:
    NYC, or thereabouts
    #21
    That's true, and I didn't mean to sound like I snapped at you. :eek:

    But I do think that small differences over the life of the computer do add up, and Apple shouldn't intentionally cripple their machines.

    So one vote for Sloth+Greed -- I do think that this is the most likely cause, although with Steve you can't entirely discount Patronizing Conceit.

    I was sort of hoping for a legitimate rationale -- something that passes the smell test. Looks like I'm not going to get it....
     
  22. Merkyworks macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2008
    #22
    ok so then a 2011 15" with a Apple 128GB SSD it will be on port 0 and while the port will support 6GB/s the SSD will only support 3GB/s. The ODD will be on port 2 and that port will only support 3GB/s, also because the ODD is on port 2 this means that the comp is not using the recalled chip.

    So I can get a 15" with the Apple SSD and move it to the optical bay and then put a 500GB 7200 HDD in the hard drive bay and both drives would only be running at 3GB/s. This set up should work just fine and there shouldn't be any issues with the setup then.
     
  23. kjos8035 macrumors member

    Joined:
    Feb 28, 2011
    #23
    Something tells me this may also mean factory installed SSD's may be the only ones supported by TRIM in Lion. Seems like they don't want people hackin and stackin ssd's into their macs :(
     
  24. Hellhammer Moderator

    Hellhammer

    Staff Member

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2008
    Location:
    Finland
    #24
    Currently only Apple SSDs support TRIM in Lion. It could, however, change since we are currently on build #1.
     
  25. KJmoon117 macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2007
    Location:
    NC
    #25
    I wonder how much Apple makes per SSD they sell...
     

Share This Page