Thinkpads Forum

So I was previously using a WD Scorpio Black 750GB HDD in my T60p. It was nice and roomy, and about as fast as I would expect a HDD to be on a SATA-I bus. Well, I wanted to speed things up more so I put in a Samsung 830 Series 256GB SSD to see how it did. The SSD is definitely faster than the laptop lol (probably about 4X since it supports SATA-III). Despite this, the increase in speed is noticeable since SSDs do a heck of a lot better in sequential reads/writes than HDDs. Here are some screenshots from HDTach.

The 750GB HDD.


The new 256GB SSD.


Comparing whole averages, the SSD is 35% faster in sequential reads (117.5 MB/s vs 87.2 MB/s). Ignoring the slow performance on the inside diameter of the platter, the SSD is still ~28% faster in sequential reads (117.5 MB/s vs ~92MB/s). Burst speed is pretty similar and only 6% higher. CPU utilization is also the same. A huge difference lies in seek time, for obvious reasons. The SSD kills the HDD with a 0.1ms seek time versus the HDD's 15.8ms. Obviously, having no physically moving parts helps a lot with that!

What are my overall impressions? Well, the laptop sort of got a new lease on life from this. Boot times (pressing power button to browsing in Chrome) went from ~46 seconds to ~29 seconds. Applications start up MUCH faster, and web browsing is actually faster since page cache writes/reads cause less of a drag now. Overall, I am very satisfied. Yes, the lower capacity means that I don't keep all of my media & stuff on the SSD. I am keeping the 750GB HDD and running it in an Ultrabay adapter. Speed doesn't really matter for it since it just keeps media now. I am thinking of getting a cheap Ultrabay adapter, gutting everything but a little of the frame, facia & interlock and running like that to shave off some weight. My music and digital photos can live on the SSD since I really don't need much else outside of the house!

Anyway, I highly recommend the upgrade to an SSD. Speeds seem to vary depending on the capacity of the SSD, even within the same product line. 256GB is a little overkill, but it seemed to have the best performance figures (not that it matters on my crusty old SATA-I bus!). I wonder if there are any hardware mods that can be done to improve SATA speeds...? I looked up the datasheets for the Intel chipsets and there's no way to swap to the ICH8 one used in T61p's really. The BGAs are different, and really the only logical choice then is to swap motherboards. Oh well, I am plenty happy with this as it is now!

EDIT:
Here are the results from CrystalDiskMark.

WD 750GB HDD


Samsung 256GB SSD


So, again sequential performance is a bit better, but the SSD UTTERLY DESTROYS the HDD in random seek performance. Considering that the seek time on an SSD is less than 1/150th of that for the HDD, this isn't super surprising. Still, it is a huge difference.

Try Middleton's bios, sorry just noticed the T60p don't know that it would work with. research it.

Thank you for this review / benchmark.

Question - are you running Win7 or a pre-Win7 OS (with no TRIM support). I understand that TRIM is quite important for the random access performance of SSDs.

Might I also suggest that you try benchmarking using CrystalDiskMark. It should make the difference in random access speed (small clusters) super-obvious.

If anything, I am quite surprised how well the mechanical drive held up in this test. At least in sequential speeds, it seems that there is far more difference between a modern 7200RPM drive and an old 5400RPM one than between the said 7200RPM and an SSD which is capped by SATA1. (my measly 5400RPM drive which came stock with the T60 barely reached 40MB/s in the same HDTach test. In fact I think the computer would feel much snappier with a faster drive. I was contemplating an SSD, but now I wonder whether I shouldn't just get a fast 7200RPM in terms of bang for the buck.

With that said, your reported boot/responsiveness differences are impressive nonwithstanding. So maybe SSD is the way to go, even such an old machine, even without Win7...

Dr_st,

According to his sig he's running Win 7 Ultimate in his machine!!

When I get home I will swap HDDs and try CrystalMark. I didn't wipe the old one or anything so it should be super easy to test both.

Yup, Win7 Ultimate x64. I think that any version of Win7 would perform about the same in this case though. I am not sure how WinXP would do with it. It seems that a LOT of people still run XP, either because Win7 is $$$ or because they got scared off by Vista. My T60p wins WAY faster with Win7x64, and it uses less system resources than XP even with all the fancy visual effects turned on.I highly recommend it.

The old HDD is this one:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.a ... 6822136835

The new one is this one:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.a ... 6820147138

The WD HDD did do pretty well for being an HDD. I think that the large capacity helps a lot since it can store more data around the platter's outside diameter where it can be accessed faster. Despite that, the SSD kills it lol...even on the slow old SATA-I interface!

What is the Middleton BIOS and what advantages does it offer? I am already running (someone here's) hacked one that bypasses the WiFi card whitelist. It was form a couple years ago, though.

Middleton's BIOS versions are only suitable for T61/R61/X61, nothing else.
They enable SATA II/300 speed, bypass the wifi-list, bypass thermal error on some boards and a few other goodies.

Understood, thanks.

Oh yeah, regarding the fast boot times...

I don't run any anti-virus software and keep the list of startup applications to an absolute minimum. I DO run Objectdock and a few sidebar gadgets, but overall I keep my installation running clean & lean. Boots get very slow if you don't maintain the list of applications putting startup registry keys in! Google, Adobe, mouse drivers, you name it...they all want to rob your boot performance! CCleaner to the rescue!

I added the results from CrystalDiskMark to the original post.

With my previous SSD I also did some benchmarking and I still have the screenshots to prove it

OCZ Vertex (1) with default Bios on T61:


OCZ Vertex with Middleton bios (full Sata2 speed):


And my current SSD with Middleton bios:


As you can see with the Middleton bios you only see a difference with sequential read/writes, which is useful for large file copying.
As an OS disk you will also see a major speed increase with a SSD on Sata 1 speed.

bmwman91:

That WD 750GB Scorpio Black is an AFD drive, so that's part of the reason the sequential read performance is so high (it uses 4KB sectors instead of the traditional ones at 512 bytes).

I just got a T60 14" model (ATI X1400 128MB, XGA+ 1400x1050 panel, etc) at a pawn shop last week for $80+tax and it's nearly in mint condition, I swear. Been thinking about upgrades (has 2GB in it presently, I know about the 3GB limit since I already have a 15" T60 as well), and an SSD seems to be the only real alternative at this point.

My intention was almost exactly the same: get an SSD for the primary system drive and use an Ultrabay adapter for either a 750GB drive (could be WD, Hitachi, or Seagate, I don't care about read speeds/etc, it's primarily just for raw storage in the laptop) so it's nice to see some benchmarks.

One question: are you using the very latest Intel chipset INF drivers/etc as well as the latest SATA controller drivers (they're two different things, and require installation separately) when you do that testing?

Considering that SATA I should be able to give up 140-145MB/second speeds (150MB is the theoretical max so it's almost always under that), it seems a bit odd that your SSD is only showing speeds around 117MB/s - that's nearly 30MB/s being lost somewhere and I'm suspecting it could be because you're using the 'stock" Windows default drivers for the chipset INF setup as well as the SATA controller - and you do have it in ACHI mode, I'm hoping, right?

If you get a chance to update those drivers/INF and then retest, I'd love to see the updated results - there SHOULD be some improvement across the board. The stock Windows drivers are from 2006 which is [censored] old and they are meant for absolute compatibility, not performance.

You can get the very latest chipset INF installer here:

http://downloadcenter.intel.com/Detail_ ... 2&lang=eng

If that link is borked, hit support.intel.com and search for "chipset inf" and get the latest one which covers the 945GM chipset in the T60.

Grab the .exe installer - and this is MOST important - you need to force the installation to overwrite the Windows drivers by installing the drivers "manually" from a Command Prompt with the switch -overall. That means open a Command Prompt (doesn't have to be Admin level), navigate to where the infinst_autol.exe is and then use the command:

infinst_autol.exe - overall (then press Enter)

to do the manual install/update. It will install every single updated inf driver/config for every piece of hardware that's covered by the installer (you'll get a bunch of the "dunk dunk" sounds as the hardware is detected and the drivers installed and configured). After a reboot you'd then need to install the updated Rapid Storage Technology SATA controller drivers from here:

http://downloadcenter.intel.com/Detail_ ... 2&lang=eng

If the link is borked, just hit support.intel.com and search support for "rapid storage technology" and grab the latest floppy F6 drivers, same link.

Get the x86 or x64 drivers as appropriate, extract the archive to a folder, then use Device Manager to update your SATA controller driver (in the IDE ATA/ATAPI controllers section) so you end up with this:



You should get higher speeds from that SSD than the ~118MB/s it's showing. Also, HDTach isn't that great a benchmark anymore for many reasons. HDTune is better, and offers more capabilities (including the option for more accurate benching but, I suppose at those speeds you're not really that concerned).

Anyway, hope this helps improve your current level of performance (and anyone else with a T60 can improve theirs as well by installing the very latest INF using that -overall switch and then updating to the very latest SATA controller driver as well (dated 10/17/11 and not the slower less efficient stock Windows one from June 2006).

Benchmark results on this T60 of mine (my 15" and the 14" as well) went up about 11% when switching from the stock Windows inf/SATA drivers to the updated ones, so... considering the age of this hardware it doesn't hurt to get the best from it that's possible.

If you've already done all this, ignore this post entirely...

Hey br0adband,

As I am sure this will be to your dismay, yes, I had already installed the latest Intel chipset & SATA drivers. I am well aware that the stock Windows ones suck.

I believe that the bottleneck in the T60p is actually the chipset. It just can't handle true SATA-150 speeds, or at least that is what I remember seeing in this section a long time ago. Certainly, this SSD can easily do well over 150MB/s as benchmarks all over the web show. The drivers are the most current, and it is just a limitation of the Napa platform & its age.

Been thinking about upgrades (has 2GB in it presently, I know about the 3GB limit since I already have a 15" T60 as well), and an SSD seems to be the only real alternative at this point.

The SSD will give you much faster virtual memory performance, and since you're limited to 3gb of ram, your system will be forced to use paging files/virtual memory, so the SSD will give more advantage then you'd normally expect.

The only other upgrade I'd consider is retrofitting a T61 board, which will allow upto 8gb of ram and faster cpu options, but one important drawback is you'd have to choose between settling for integrated graphics, or risking possible failure of nvidia gpu on the discrete models. If you get a discrete board that's never failed, there is a very good chance it will work for many years without issue, but unfortunately there is no shortage of people who will reflow or bake a failed board and sell it, which is sure to fail, but good tested boards are available from myself and other sellers here. One additional benefit to the T61 board is they support SATA2, so your SSD will perform much faster. I'm currently using a FrankNpad T60p with T61p board, 8gb ram, 2.8ghz X9000 cpu and 128gb lenovo (toshiba) SSD. This is one mean system and has a beautiful boe hydis uxga screen.

I'm currently in the process of building another with a rare penryn board with discrete graphics (42w7873), T9300 cpu, 4gb ram and a beautiful SXGA+ IPS screen. It may become my "daily driver" so I don't put a lot of wear/tear on my other system which has cost me enough to buy several laptops lol

Not meaning to hijack the thread, but... I thought a T61 board (not a T61p) wouldn't fit in the T60 (not T60p) chassis because of internal differences...? I don't care about Nvidia graphics and I avoid them at all costs anyway, so the X3100 on the 965 chipset would be more than enough I suppose, but I was under the impression that a T61 mobo wasn't just a simple "drop in replacement" on the 14" T60, or even the 15" because of differences... guess I need to do more research.

That's most certainly an option and getting SATA II support would be a big benefit, definitely.

While an SSD certainly can improve virtual memory operation, I think that it is hardly a selling point. Even with a 3GB RAM limitation on the T60, if you are actually occupying all of it, then one of two things is going on:
1) You don't do any system maintenance and have 32760326474583 vestigial background processes running and you should do something about that.
2) You are doing hardcore gaming, video editing, CAD work or data analysis, in which case, a 5+ year old Thinkpad is the wrong machine for you.

I do plenty of CAD work on mine, image editing, MatLAB, etc. Never have I run out of physical memory. Maybe some people like to do all of that at the same time, I don't know, but I usually don't do more than one or two of those things at a time. Heck, I usually just run with NO page file at all! That hasn't caused me any issues in years.

So, technically you are correct that an SSD is advantageous in offering better v-mem performance.

As far as T61 mobo swaps go, I have no idea. For the stuff I do, I could never consider integrated graphics (MAYBE the Ivy Bridge HD4000 could cut it), but the T61's with dedicated nVidia graphics were timebombs. I had one at work back when they were new, and within 12 months the video output would shut off when I ran the GPU hard. It is truly unfortunate, because a T61p mobo with a GPU in a T60p case with a Flexview screen is the bee's knees as far as I am concerned. Would running a T500 fan (the other thread I am frequenting right now) on a T61p mobo with dedicated graphics help to prevent the GPU failure?

Oh and here's a really sad thing.

My current work machine is a W520 with a 2720QM CPU, 16GB RAM and dedicated GPU. When put to a specific task, it blows away my T60p. In terms of system FEEL, it is a total slug thanks to the corporate Win7 image I am required to run. My GOD, I hate it. From cold boot to browsing in Chrome takes almost 3 minutes, wheras my T60p takes about 30 seconds. Loading applications and menus is arduously slow on the W520...what a freaking shame! I know that it is all the corp garbage, and I have vented to our IT guy (he's great, but not much he can do about it). At the same time, I get a lot of satisfaction out of owning this "ancient" T60p that generally blows away any new one with an OEM image in terms of responsiveness. It still does well in terms of performance since it can load applications faster and get to work sooner to make-up for its aging hardware.

I ran HDTach on the W520. Average sequential speed was ~87MB/s, burst was ~160MB/s and seek time was 17.8ms. It is a Seagate Momentus 7200.4 500GB HDD. So, the s****y HDD performance really is the fault of that piece of junk, rather than the laptop itself. Why Lenovo (or IT, I don't know) would build a powerhouse like the W520 and then cripple it with a 3 year old HDD is beyond me. I am askign IT for an SSD lol.

You could consider to create an extra partition on that W520 and install your own "private" Windows with dual boot. That's what I did on my T61 laptop from work, which also had a very slow configuration with virus scanners and a buch of other crap
At the time I had to return it I removed the extra partition and disabled the dual boot menu.

That's a neat idea. It wouldn't really work for me though since a lot of what I do uses the corpnet permissions that are in the IT image to handle sharepoint access and various network resources. I would be typing passwords in all day!

I'm going to talk to our IT guy when I am back in the US and see what work-arounds we can come up with.