Page 1 of 1

Is the 2623-DDU T60p an SATA 150 or 300 Interface?

Posted: Thu Dec 20, 2007 7:06 pm
by DenTP4rm
The subject line says it all. I just want to know what to set the jumper on a new Seagate SATA 300 capable drive to. I have searched the manual and the Lenovo site and can't get a solid answer on this. Some commercial sites indicate it is SATA 300 but I'd like to be sure.

I have ready it probably isn't going to make a difference as far as actual speed goes, but, I'd just like to know.

If you have the answer and can point me to an official page that confirms it I'd appreciate it.

thanks,
DenTP4rm

Posted: Thu Dec 20, 2007 10:04 pm
by Harryc
This is a good question and I'm interested in the answer myself. The Tawbook doesn't list T60's yet, and I do see the commercial site references to SATA 300. Detailed Lenovo specs for the T60 series do not mention either 150 or 300.
Detailed T60 Specs

Posted: Thu Dec 20, 2007 10:11 pm
by sugo
Um ... tabook says the chipset supports SATA 300.

Re: Is the 2623-DDU T60p an SATA 150 or 300 Interface?

Posted: Thu Dec 20, 2007 10:17 pm
by bill bolton
DenTP4rm wrote:The subject line says it all. I just want to know what to set the jumper on a new Seagate SATA 300 capable drive to.
Well, when I bought a couple of Seagate 120GB 2.5" 7200 rpm SATA drives recently, I just put them straight into an T60 and an X61 without changing anything on the drives.... and they just worked.

Cheers,

Bill B.

Posted: Thu Dec 20, 2007 10:51 pm
by Harryc
sugo wrote:Um ... tabook says the chipset supports SATA 300.
I looked in the latest tabook and didn't see T60's listed. Link please? T61 definitely says SATA300.

Posted: Fri Dec 21, 2007 12:02 am
by sugo
Oh I was looking at the June 2007 version of tabook I downloaded long time ago. It has both T60 and T61.

Posted: Fri Dec 21, 2007 12:54 am
by DenTP4rm
HarryC & sugo
Thanks for the link to the specs. The link I had to that page was no longer working. The latest Tabook I have that listed the T60p is from Dec, 2006 and it has:

"Architecture: Mobile Intel 945PM Express Chipset / 82945PM Memory Controller Hub / 82801GBM ICH7-M I/O Controller Hub (SATA300, ATA-100 EIDE, PCI Express x1, PCI bus, USB, LPC interface, [Bluetooth], [fi ngerprint]) / PCI bus (TI® PCI1512 CardBus controller) / LPC bus (National Semiconductor® PC87382 Super I/O, Atmel® 97SC3203)"

This to me would seem to indicate these models already had the ATA300 controller. However conflicting information I have seen in other places (which I failed to note links for) indicates it is just SATA150. I'm assuming the "ATA-100 EIDE" is for the ultrabay?

Bill Bolton,
Thanks also for your input. Glad to hear your Seagates are working fine. Here is a link on the Seagate site regarding the jumpers.
http://www.seagate.com/ww/v/index.jsp?l ... 04090aRCRD
My 200GB drives came with the jumper on which apparently limits data transfer to 1.5 Gb per second. There's another link at that page indicating this is the case. If you just put your drives in as you received them it may well be that they had the jumper on and thus would have been set to operate at SATA150 level.

Bill, I don't know if you are aware but Seagate's "G-Force Protection freefall sensor technology" is designated by the "G" at the end of the ST9200420ASG serial number of the 200GB drive. (See http://www.seagate.com/docs/pdf/datashe ... 7200_2.pdf) Were yours the non-G or "G" model.

If the latter, have you noticed any increased sensitivity to movement on your rigs?

I'd like to hear from anybody who has installed one of the SATA300 drives configured for that and how it has gone so far.
thanks guys,
DenTP4rm

Posted: Sat Dec 22, 2007 3:17 am
by bill bolton
DenTP4rm wrote:My 200GB drives came with the jumper on which apparently limits data transfer to 1.5 Gb per second.
The drive will top out at less than that in actual transfer, even at burst speed, so there's no any point in sweating on the jumper settings for SATA speed on point-to-point SATA links, with the current generation of drives.

Run HD Tach or HD tune and see for yourself.
DenTP4rm wrote:Were yours the non-G or "G" model.
No.... they cost more and there no point is laying out $$$ for something that already built in to my ThinkPads.

Cheers,

Bill B.