SSD performance difference in older MBPs

[dgdosen]

I've got a late 2006 MBP (Merom) and don't want to give it up because I hacked in a higher res screen - but do want to take advantage of SSDs -

So my question is, is there a noticeable difference in SSD perf (say an Intel X25-M) on this slightly dated MBP compared to the latest?

I'm not even sure what SATA version is used on my MBP compared to the newer models, and if the Intel SSD bumps up to that ceiling.

Thanks in advance for any answers...

 

[HiFiGuy528]

here you go.

http://www.anandtech.com/mac/showdoc.aspx?i=3287

 

[dgdosen]

hmm - I think that article was discussing controllers in the ssd's themselves, and not the machines used to run them...

 

[Thiol]

hmm - I think that article was discussing controllers in the ssd's themselves, and not the machines used to run them...

Even with an old SATA I interface you won't be limited by the bandwidth with a SSD.

 

[dgdosen]

Even with an old SATA I interface you won't be limited by the bandwidth with a SSD.

If I look at XBench data for some tests - it looks like older models aren't able to get uncached reads running as fast as Intel says they are.

On the other hand, the new Unibody (MBPs and MBs) seem to be able to hit that limit.

I'm just wondering if drives like Intel's X25-M are better suited for the new Unibodies...

Can anyone comment? I could be a big help in my drive to get a new laptop

 

[dgdosen]

This thread seems to sum this up nicely:

It looks like only the newer unibody devices take advantage of SATA2

https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/603137/

 

[Thiol]

This thread seems to sum this up nicely:

It looks like only the newer unibody devices take advantage of SATA2

https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/603137/

I stand corrected. Looks like you can actually saturate the read speed on a SATAI.