 |  |  |  |  |
Mobile Chipsets Don't Take Advantage of SSDs faster than SATA150 spec ?
| |||||||||
|
Mobile Chipsets Don't Take Advantage of SSDs faster than SATA150 spec ?
| | |||||||
 |
 |
| | Thread Tools |
10th March 2009, 01:47
| #11 |
| Member Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 1,640
 |  First site I googled up: http://www.notebookcheck.net/Review-...B.14106.0.html 9400M laptop and X25-M drive. Seems to look like 1.5 GB/s bottleneck if going by the read performance? I am very surprised by this, would have thought the 9400M was better... |
|  |
|
10th March 2009, 07:39
| #12 |
| Member  Join Date: May 2005 Location: UK
Posts: 507
| Well, there is some debate whether there is any SSD that has sustained transfer rates above 150MB/s. Burst speeds have certainly exceeded SATA-I. |
|
| |
|
15th June 2009, 11:19
| #13 |
| [M] Reviewer  Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 1,891
| I guess this thread gets a bit of a renewal now that Apple's new notebooks seem to get a new 1,5Gb SATA speed cap. http://www.dailytech.com/article.aspx?newsid=15410
__________________  |
|
| |
|
15th June 2009, 12:16
| #14 |
| Madshrimp  Join Date: May 2002 Location: 7090/Belgium
Posts: 82,497
 | they wanted to save money by using a cheaper chipset which suffices for HDDs but is too slow to get max performance from SSD. and this in a $1100 product...
__________________  |
|
| |
|
15th June 2009, 13:11
| #15 | |
| [M] Reviewer Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 1,891
| Quote:
__________________ | |
|
| |
|
15th June 2009, 13:55
| #16 | |
| Madshrimp Join Date: May 2002 Location: 7090/Belgium
Posts: 82,497
| Quote:
__________________ | |
|
| |
|
15th June 2009, 20:53
| #17 | |
| Madshrimp Join Date: May 2002 Location: 7090/Belgium
Posts: 82,497
| Quote:
__________________ | |
|
| |
|
| Thread Tools | |
| |
