New MacBook Pros shipped with HDDs only have 1.5Gbps SATA enabled
By Nilay Patel 
posted Jun 15th 2009 2:24PM
posted Jun 15th 2009 2:24PM
[Thanks to everyone who sent this in]
posted Jun 15th 2009 2:24PM
Now that we've thrown 'em off the trail, use the form below to get in touch with the people at Engadget. Please fill in all of the required fields because they're required.
I'll still take one when you're done reviewing it.
Still there is no reason why this way done..
Was there?
The article is wrong when it states that this won't affect anyone.
Typical HDDs today come with 8MB to 16MB caches that are capable of sustaining 3.0GBps transfers. Since it's a cache, this isn't a burst mode transfer -- rather something fairly ephemeral, but it's still a limitation nonetheless.
sounds like the seagate hard drive issue, they're 3.0 Gb/s, but end up having a jumper installed that makes them 1.5 Gb/s and it's a simple task of removing the jumper...if any of you mac people are willing to sacrifice the warranty of your computer in order to test it out, be my guest...all I have to say is that this is one of the reasons why I don't trust the manufacturers of most computers.
Just another reason to BOO
at crapple
There are other computers that seem to have the same issue--not just Apple-branded computers--where the OEM has artificially lowered the SATA bus speed. Forums suggest that it can be fixed by using a different hard drive or setting jumpers (as the previous poster mentioned).
I'm not certain though... I don't have a dog in this fight, so I'm not going to do any more research on it... but if you're affected, maybe you need to Google for some ideas to try.
Stop.
This is most likely due to a jumper on the hdd. No current hdd today (not even 3.5") will get over 120MB/s, and since this speed handles over 150MB/s, there is nothing to worry about.
The controller is the same as the one used with the SSD versions, so replacing the hdd with a ssd will probably get you full 3.0Gb/s speeds.
Calm the hell down.
I'm not buying this. Looks to me like you have the Hitachi 320GB drive at 5400 RPM.
I have the MacBook unibody, and I have the exact same NVidia chip set (MCP79). The original 250 GB 5400 RPM drive ran at 1.5. I put in a WD Scorpio Black 320/7200 and now it reports 3.0. This, in all likelihood, depends on the DRIVE not the chip set or the drivers.
I saw a significant increase in performance with the WD Scorpio Black drive, which only cost $89 from NewEgg, BTW. Also this drive has a 16MB buffer, which runs at the full 3.0 SATA bus speed...
I know that you guys feel the need to publish the occasional "anti Apple" story to combat the haters, but at least pick something that actually matters, like how come no BlueRay or eSATA support on "Professional" machines?
Taking out the HDD doesn't void the warranty, the new MBPs are made to have user-replaceable HDDs. Since my MBP has the same chipset but 3 Gbps, I am pretty sure it can be changed.
Really? REALLY? If you slap in a SATAII SSD Drive, it'll run at 3.0, the hard drive is 1.5, thus the bottleneck...
For the record, you all are wrong.
Didn't see this before this article, but my X25-M in my MacBook Pro (ordered day of the WWDC) is running at 1.5Gb/s
Anyone want to point me to some place I can fix this? I'm really really pissed right now.
CraigJ, did you notice a battery life drop using this WD Scorpio RPM ?
I'm planning to get one MB Pro 13", but I was thinking of getting the $1,199 model and put a better HDD and more memory myself.
@perral1: http://picasaweb.google.com/CraigJacobs99/Misc#5347764734536319618 Note I have the exact same chip set as Engadget's MBP, just a different drive...
@romulo.fernandes: Yes, I have noticed that the battery life is diminished a bit, hard to say exactly how much. Also, there is a bit of additional noise, but really not much, and there is a bit more heat. But those are trade offs I was willing to make for performance.
Also, I just got the crucial 4GB kit for $64. Do it yourself, you'll be quite happy with the result.
Note that you need a set of Torex drivers...
@CraigJ
And my own:
http://files.getdropbox.com/u/1344517/Temp.tiff
Just wondering, how much $$$ can Apple save by using a 1.5GBps controller? $0.02?
My $0.02...
Nothing, the Chipset can do SATA II, its a Firmware setting.
It's the same controller
Is it possible to reflash the better firmware over the top?
Could be a power saving feature for a longer battery life, Just a guess though.
Or, better stability.
maybe apple did it to cut costs?
nvidia selling apple those chip who can't do full 3GB but still 1.5GB. so a firmwarefix won't be posssible. using lower quality chips in cheaper products is pretty common for graphiccards. so why not for chipsets?
just a thought.
c.
It's to be different.
Not sure how this is a cost-cutting measure, the 9400 chipset doesn't exist in SATA-1 flavor, only SATA-2; I wonder however if it's to force lower power requirements (thus making the battery last longer, aka "7 hours" as promised by Apple). Though I seriously wonder if the power needs between SATA-1 and SATA-2 are big enough to make a noticeable difference.
Wow, some engineer forgets to flip a bit in the firmware and people go nuts!
My hopes for humanity go down the toilet again...
There are cases that could justify running a chip technically capable of a certain speed at a lower rating. For instance, maybe some quirk in their PCB layout has forced a certain inductance on a certain line that prevents reliable operation at that speed? It speaks enough about the ineptitude of certain electrical engineers, but doesn't mean that it can be fixed.
Biggest dick move ever.
How many people does this affect? The macbook pro has a UNIBODY CONSTRUCTION!!!!!! NOBODY wants to take apart a macbook pro to put a SSD in it... and if you do then buy the 15 inch. this affects noone. stop with all the FUDs
its Apple they will release it later as a firmware update later. And make you feel like it s a privilege to use stuff you own.
Not the biggest dick move, just typical Apple dick move. *cough* iPhone 3.0 *cough*
Seeing as the HD is a user replaceable item in Apples eye alot of people will. It affects the 13 and 15", not the 17" Once the SSDs go down then alot more people will be upgrading. I will be one of them.
I don't know, the charging a few bucks or requiring users to update to Leopard to get the drivers to get wireless N to work on the 17" iMacs still seems a bit worse then this. I would see more users making use of wireless N over wireless G than users updating a to a SSD from a HDD. Either way the fact that they even went out of the way to limit the chipset to 1.5G spec is still a douche bag move on Apples part.
Hey murmermer, why are you spamming the comments with 20 copies of the same post? We heard you the first time.
Besides, who gives crap about how many people this affects? The point is that with SSDs becoming more and more common today, it makes absolutely no sense whatsoever for Apple to to stick a 2003 controller into a 2009 laptop.
The only reason I can see is that with this they are now effectively forcing you to pay their much higher prices for upgrades that normally cost was less if you do them yourself.
Somebody mentioned that SATA II could be enabled by firmware upgrade, and that the SATA I mode would be for power saving reasons. I haven't thought of that, so if that's the case I take it back.
@Murmermer the first thing I intend to do when I get my unibody Macbook Pro is upgrade the hard drive to a 500gb one and the memory from 2GB to 4GB, because I can purchase all of these upgrades myself for so much cheaper than Apple offers them, and I'm not an idiot who doesn't know how to remove 10 screws.
Sounds like a user SSD upgrade cock block. Typical Apple.
The unibody makes it easier to take apart.
"I'm posting it again because you can't be original and think of something new to say."
lol. I believe you would be the one who isn't original if you're posting the same thing again and again.
Hey Joseph, you dimwit, the point is not taking it apart but rather that only people who bought an SSD pre-installed get full Sata 2.0 speed. So people who buy their own get slower speeds. Obviously any idiot with a single digit IQ knows that only SSDs can saturate a SATA 1 connection and could actually utilize the SATA 2.0 connection which they have denied. Now did it get into your thick skull?
what could possibly be the price difference between controllers? I really hope Apple wasn't trying to save just 5 cents by capping people with the intention of upgrading their HD in a years time.
seriously Apple, w t f
makes sense since they cut like what 200 300 off the price. sometimes u gotta make sacrifices.
Be cool if they gave you an option online to fix that though, if you wanted the faster one.
No, it really doesn't, because this means that Apple has to keep stock of both 1.5 Gbps and 3.0 Gbps SATA controllers instead of just the 3.0 Gbps controllers when they used to just have one part. It's like if Honda stopped using any common parts with Acuras in Accords to motivate people to buy Acuras over Honda branded vehicles.
It's the same controller/chipset as before. No cost difference to them.
bad apple
Return that crap people, I mean for less money there are lighter, sturdier machines in the world. They go beyond that Aluminum Coke can stuff and use Magnesium Alloy, Carbon Fiber etc.
For cheaper than a macbook? Can you link to some please?
Certainly, you could configure a Lenovo X200s now for less than $1300 that weighs 2.4lbs and has a magnesium alloy bottom case and carbon fiber top. Use the coupon codes that keep coming up.
You could go to Dell outlet and for less than $1000 get a beautiful Latitude E4200 that weighs 2.2lbs and is fully Magnesium Alloy.
I'm telling you, you won't look at a overhyped Macbook after seeing either of those, but the Dell especially is gorgeous. Both have solid metal hinges. The Dell, just looks so modern professional, while the Lenovo, well is typical black industrial design. I've owned three Thinkpad X series and have dropped them, spilled water on them, even stepped on one of them. They all still work.
The E4200 is $1600 after the rebate and only has a 1.2 ghz processor. Plus Dell laptops have a nasty trend of motherboard failures.
The Lenovo is on sale for less than the macbook, and looks to be a good deal. Of course, you get less memory and a crappy graphics card.
Has the "old" Unibody Macbook a 3GBps chip or just the 1.5GBps too?
i just checked my 17" unibody and it says 3gbps, so at least the 17" has the faster controller
Yep, the unibody MacBook is set at 3gbps, or so System Profiler says.
Two steps forward, one step back...