important: check your new 13" MBP's sata connection

Posted:
in Current Mac Hardware edited January 2014
MacRumors - 13" Mbp Only 1.5gb Sata ?



We need to collect as much information as we can about this.
«1

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 22
    hmurchisonhmurchison Posts: 12,268member
    R'uh R'oh Scrappy.



    I'm sure it'll be an easy fix ...10.5.8?
  • Reply 2 of 22
    That might be a concern for SSD users. A 5400RPM notebook drive isn't going to need more bandwidth, though.
  • Reply 4 of 22
    mazda 3smazda 3s Posts: 1,570member
    Now Engadget has posted on it as well. What's the holdup, AI???



    http://www.engadget.com/2009/06/15/n...ps-sata-chips/
  • Reply 5 of 22
    MarvinMarvin Posts: 14,217moderator
    Nothing to be concerned about really, that still allows up to 187MBps transfer. SSDs only just manage to come close to this.



    Even a 7200 rpm drive will only reach about 70MBps.



    Using the abbreviation for Macbook Pro here could be confusing as it kind of looks like the title says 13 Mbps, which would be a cause for concern but it's just the 13" MBP name.
  • Reply 6 of 22
    mazda 3smazda 3s Posts: 1,570member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Marvin View Post


    Nothing to be concerned about really, that still allows up to 187MBps transfer. SSDs only just manage to come close to this.



    Even a 7200 rpm drive will only reach about 70MBps.



    Using the abbreviation for Macbook Pro here could be confusing as it kind of looks like the title says 13 Mbps, which would be a cause for concern but it's just the 13" MBP name.



    Ummm, from Gizmodo:



    Quote:

    Older 13" MBA, 13" MB, 17" MBP (and old versions of 13"/15" MBP):



    Sequential READ = 225 MB/sec

    Sequential WRITE = 180 MB/sec




    New 13" MBP, 15" MBP



    Sequential READ = 115 MB/sec

    Sequential WRITE = 95 MB/sec



    That doesn't seem like something that we "shouldn't be concerned with". This is a big story, and I'm just wondering why AI hasn't tackled it yet.
  • Reply 7 of 22
    sdw2001sdw2001 Posts: 17,035member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Mazda 3s View Post


    Ummm, from Gizmodo:







    That doesn't seem like something that we "shouldn't be concerned with". This is a big story, and I'm just wondering why AI hasn't tackled it yet.



    Those are theoretical numbers, not actual speeds. It's like saying my internet runs a 20mbs downstream. It does...but you'll never see that in the real world.
  • Reply 8 of 22
    mazda 3smazda 3s Posts: 1,570member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post


    Those are theoretical numbers, not actual speeds. It's like saying my internet runs a 20mbs downstream. It does...but you'll never see that in the real world.



    Regardless of whether it's theoretical or not, Apple downgrading hardware specs from SATA 3.0 to SATA 1.5 and not reporting on it seems to be a bit bonkers, don't you think? You'd think that AI would at least try to contact Apple to get their side of the story.



    This has blown up into a big issue with multiple 30+ page threads on Mac Rumors, large discussions on Apple Discussion forums, coverage over many of the large news sites and AI acts like the issue doesn't even exist.



    I mean, not reporting on this issue, but reporting on Steve Jobs' abandoned mansion? I mean, come on
  • Reply 9 of 22
    wally007wally007 Posts: 121member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Mazda 3s View Post


    Regardless of whether it's theoretical or not, Apple downgrading hardware specs from SATA 3.0 to SATA 1.5 and not reporting on it seems to be a bit bonkers, don't you think? You'd think that AI would at least try to contact Apple to get their side of the story.



    This has blown up into a big issue with multiple 30+ page threads on Mac Rumors, large discussions on Apple Discussion forums, coverage over many of the large news sites and AI acts like the issue doesn't even exist.



    I mean, not reporting on this issue, but reporting on Steve Jobs' abandoned mansion? I mean, come on



    well what do you expect from AI ? Did you read their article comparing snow leopard and windows7 ?



    i own 3 macs and havent bought PC in 5 years but that article made me cringe... worst case of fan boyi in love i've ever seen.
  • Reply 10 of 22
    hmurchisonhmurchison Posts: 12,268member
    "Uh...1.5Gbps should be enough for anyone"



    Bill Gates

    2009
  • Reply 11 of 22
    futurepastnowfuturepastnow Posts: 1,772member
    This is almost certainly a software problem, to be fixed in a future update.
  • Reply 12 of 22
    MarvinMarvin Posts: 14,217moderator
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by FuturePastNow View Post


    This is almost certainly a software problem, to be fixed in a future update.



    Engadget says that if you buy the MBP with an SSD drive, it comes with 3Gbps but if you order it with a HDD, it comes with 1.5Gbps. That seems a bit odd to be a mistake and is clearly a firmware issue - it looks like Apple want you to be ordering their BTO SSD drives instead of installing your own for a cheaper price.



    Obviously, it makes Apple's supplied drives look faster than 3rd party ones but it's not as if reviewers won't be able to check if their SATA connection was downgraded.



    As I say though, the limits are still pretty high and even an X-25M doesn't get over 100MB/s sequential write. You have to pick particular SSD drives in order to see the difference. It's still not a good thing and it should be fixed and it's particularly bad if it was a deliberate move.
  • Reply 13 of 22
    sdw2001sdw2001 Posts: 17,035member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Mazda 3s View Post


    Regardless of whether it's theoretical or not, Apple downgrading hardware specs from SATA 3.0 to SATA 1.5 and not reporting on it seems to be a bit bonkers, don't you think? You'd think that AI would at least try to contact Apple to get their side of the story.



    Bonkers? Yeah...kinda. I just don't think it really matters.



    Quote:



    This has blown up into a big issue with multiple 30+ page threads on Mac Rumors, large discussions on Apple Discussion forums, coverage over many of the large news sites and AI acts like the issue doesn't even exist.



    I mean, not reporting on this issue, but reporting on Steve Jobs' abandoned mansion? I mean, come on



    LOL. Agreed. But we do get six page reviews on the new shuffle that read like they are written by an English professor.
  • Reply 14 of 22
    nvidia2008nvidia2008 Posts: 9,262member
    Just read this on Engadget. Very interesting. My 13" MacBook (not Pro) Aluminium from "late 2008" (though I bought it refurbished a few months ago) has Sata 3.0 GBps ... w00ts *does "the dance"*... SSD come to me babyyyy.... Right now have a WD Scorpio Black 7200rpm drive in there. Nice and fast. Only issue is some distinct vibration, try other brands if you can.



    I think its a firmware mistake and Apple will rectify it within the next month. Makes absolutely no sense to have intentionally crippled the Sata interface thingy.



    We need more informations from the Internets!
  • Reply 15 of 22
    acr4acr4 Posts: 100member
    It makes no sense for Apple to use a different controller for HDD and SSD drives - they only want to make one motherboard. I'm sure this is a firmware issue.



    There's no need for 3 Gbps on 5400 rpm drives. The SATA link is far from saturated. It makes perfect sense to downgrade systems ordered with rotating drives to save power consumption (i.e. battery life). For systems ordered with solid-state drives, the power saved over rotating media most likely more than covers the increased power consumption from the upgraded SATA II (3 Gbps) link.



    Has anyone tried putting an SSD into a system that was ordered with an HDD? It could be that BIOS/firmware detects an SSD and upgrades the link (or rather, sees an HDD and downgrades it...) All this moaning and groaning could be irrelevant - Apple was probably wise enough to streamline production flow AND boost battery performance with a few line of firmware.
  • Reply 16 of 22
    nvidia2008nvidia2008 Posts: 9,262member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by acr4 View Post


    ...Has anyone tried putting an SSD into a system that was ordered with an HDD? It could be that BIOS/firmware detects an SSD and upgrades the link (or rather, sees an HDD and downgrades it...) All this moaning and groaning could be irrelevant - Apple was probably wise enough to streamline production flow AND boost battery performance with a few line of firmware.



    Reports on the web seem to indicate if you put an SSD into a HDD MacBook Pro you get only Sata 1.5Gbps...
  • Reply 17 of 22
    I mean, it almost sounds to me like it's not correctly recognizing the speeds supported by some (but not all) drives, and then failsafes to the slower speed which it knows will work. That's a weird bug that could either be in the EFI or the SATA driver.
  • Reply 18 of 22
    welshdogwelshdog Posts: 1,684member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by nvidia2008 View Post


    Reports on the web seem to indicate if you put an SSD into a HDD MacBook Pro you get only Sata 1.5Gbps...



    I was in the Barton Creek store last week and I checked a 13" MBP. System profiler showed 1.5Gbps. This was without any SSD in the slot.

    This article says Apple has a problem with their drivers:



    Macsimum News
  • Reply 19 of 22
    nvidia2008nvidia2008 Posts: 9,262member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by WelshDog View Post


    I was in the Barton Creek store last week and I checked a 13" MBP. System profiler showed 1.5Gbps. This was without any SSD in the slot.

    This article says Apple has a problem with their drivers:



    Macsimum News



    But is this problem still happening with Apple-shipped SSD MacBook Pros? Those show SATA 3.0Gbps ... Has their IO speeds been tested?
  • Reply 20 of 22
    palterpalter Posts: 98member
    Apple has just released a firmware update for the new MacBook Pro's that fixes this. See http://support.apple.com/downloads/M...re_Update_1_7_
Sign In or Register to comment.