SATA-II failure to live up to specifications..?

[hellosailor]

ds-
Photoshop, image processing software, video, CAD rendering, all are notorious for using every meg of RAM they can find, and then slowing down radically when they need to go disk-swapping for virtual memory. Some of the folks using that software have expensive systems and expensive hourly rates, and clipping an extra five minutes per hour, or half hour or hour per day, adds up and makes the hardware costs readily justifiable.
Last time I checked, Photoshop would quickly grab more than 3x the size of the image it was working with, in live RAM. Old version, new version, working version, all loaded live, plus overhead for the program and OS, total about 3-1/2 time the image size worth of RAM used. And if you don't have that much RAM--drives chatter like mad and slow the work down.
For work like that, I can see this as a real issue.

Not to mention the other issue: Whether someone lied by accident or intent, or whether "is is" as a certain disbarred attorney and former politician once remarked.

[TTY]

In real world usage is there really that much difference between a HD and an SSD?

In this Lenovo Blog, the difference is said to be "immediate and dramatic". I do feel, however, that a 20 MByte/s data transfer rate, which the OP claims for mechanical hard drives, is a rather pessimistic statement. Although some mechanical hard disks do have such transfer rates, many contemporary hard disks are considerably faster. For instance, a review of a Hitachi Travelstar 7K320 shows 40.3 MByte/s minimum sustained read rate and 82.0 MByte/s maximum sustained read rate.

[Daniel]

In real world usage, a SSD will make more difference in feel than most other hardware components. Check out what reviewers have said after using an Intel SSD.

http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/in ... i=3403&p=1
Anand from Anandtech - "The biggest upgrade you could do for your PC - whether desktop or notebook, wouldn't be to toss in a faster CPU, it would be to migrate to one of these SSDs. This thing is fast, and I want one in my system...actually, two. It's the only SSD that I would actually go out, buy and stick in my desktop machine at this point. I think that's the first time I've ever said something like that in a review, but I'm absolutely convinced. I've been using SSDs in my systems for a few months now and I'm hooked."

Quoting the Lenovo Blog (http://lenovoblogs.com/insidethebox/?p=148): "The difference was immediate and dramatic. Boot time was cut in half. Our corporate email program and instant messaging program also load in one half of the time they used to. Even opening and closing large MS Office PowerPoint files is a much faster operation than ever before. Though all of those were enough to make me go “Wow!,” here is the most surprising thing of all: my web browsing has become noticeably much zippier. Pages literally just snap into place. I never thought browsing was slow before, so the difference is all the more dramatic. A few more observations: This drive definitely runs cooler. I can’t even feel it under my palm rest like I could with my old drive. Write times are definitely slower than read times, but still faster than before. I’m okay with that. Battery life has definitely improved. When I am actively using my PC, I get about an extra 20 – 30 minutes per charge. When I’m doing something more passive (at least from a system perspective) like email, my battery life is now about an hour longer than before."

I've always wondered why my old desktop always seemed faster browsing the internet than my newer notebook. I'm assuming it's because of the hard drive random seek access time being slower on the notebook.

This is a bit off topic but some people were questioning the difference an SSD makes so here are some numbers from Anandtech's article:

Powerpoint 2007 load time:
Intel SSD: .94 seconds
Western Digital Velociraptor (fastest SATA desktop hard drive): 2.22 seconds
Seagate Momentus 7200.2 (one of the fastest laptop hard drives): 4.5 seconds

Adobe Photoshop CS3 load time:
Intel SSD: 2.28 seconds
Wester Digital Velociraptor: 6.12 seconds
Seagate Momentus 7200.2: 10.5 seconds

Extracting an archive while an antivirus scan is happening:
Intel SSD: 317 seconds
Wester Digital Velociraptor: 1393 seconds
Seagate Momentus 7200.2: 2430 seconds

People spend hundreds of dollars for a faster CPU which gives performance measured in single digit percentages while these SSDs can improve performance by several hundred percent not to mention making your notebook more shock resistant, more energy efficient, and more reliable.

[Marin85]

I guess the above app load times are the times measured on first start of these apps after boot. Otherwise, they should start instantly, as there would be (almost or entirely) no calls to the HD (cached, so only the cpu is "in charge").

[bill bolton]

Seagate Momentus 7200.2 (one of the fastest laptop hard drives): 4.5 seconds

Given that Seagate has been selling Momentus 7200.3 drives for quite a while now and has just started delivering Momentus 7200.4 drives, this comparison seems to be somewhat out of date!

Cheers,

Bill B.

[erik]

Adobe Photoshop CS3 load time:
Intel SSD: 2.28 seconds
Wester Digital Velociraptor: 6.12 seconds
Seagate Momentus 7200.2: 10.5 seconds

photoshop CS4 extended x64 loads in less than 3 seconds per my extremely crude stopwatch technique on my X61s using an X300's 64GB samsung SLC SSD running server 2008 enterprise x64 with 4GB of memory.

given that, has anyone tested the samsung SLC SSD against an intel SSD in a SATA-300-capable system?   i'm curious if the synthetic benchmarks actually play out in real-world use or if SATA 150 is perfectly suffice for SSDs to work at their potential.

i don't refute the erroneous information in the thinkpad PSREF but can't help but question if this translates into a real-world problem, especially given how much faster an SSD made my X61s even with its SATA 150 limitation.

[loyukfai]

Given that Seagate has been selling Momentus 7200.3 drives for quite a while now and has just started delivering Momentus 7200.4 drives, this comparison seems to be somewhat out of date!

Possibly. But seek time (of the same spindle speed) hasn't changed much from one generation to another generation in recent years, AFAIK.

Sequential speed has improved, through.

Average seek time:
7200.2: 11ms (http://www.jail.se/hardware/laptop/clev ... 200420.pdf)
7200.3: 11ms (http://www.seagate.com/ww/v/index.jsp?v ... ee0a0aRCRD)
7200.4: 11ms (http://www.seagate.com/ww/v/index.jsp?v ... cale=en-US)

[Marin85]

Here we may be starting another thread on false advertisements, because the seek times of those Seagate drives measured in reality by synthetic benchmark tools like HDTach and HDTune are way longer than the advertised 11ms.

7200.2: about 14.4 ms
7200.3: about 16.2 ms
7200.4: about 16.7-17.1 ms

In fact, this is a degradation, not improvement of the seek times, despite the vastly improved transfers.

So, if anyone has managed to come even close to 12 or 13 ms, please feel free to post your results

Marin

[{ISV-K}SVX]

I have to say I am somewhat disappointed in this thread and the Admins actions forthwith. While following this thread I have seen such OT topics as attacks on peoples education/skill levels to talk from Bill about lagging economic situation and lefttist government as it pertains to corporations. While I am not one to jump on the "Fraud/Class Action lawsuit" bandwagon, I think there is a legitimate concern for users who are looking for the performance they thought they were purchasing. If anything, censoring peoples comments as have been performed in this thread are the most "extremist" form of management/gov possible from BOTH sides (left or right). I will leave it at that...

I for one ran into this issue when I purchased a pair of 7200.4 500GB Seagate disks for my T61p. Near 95% of the time when one disk was in the SATA media tray it would fail to initialize upon boot. After doing some web searching and thread searching here I ran across a Seagate jumper setting which lowered the speed from 3Gbps to 1.5Gbps. I applied this jumper and it reduced the initialization error percent to near 25%. Although it did not solve the problem, it lowered the probability of it occurring. Of the times when it does occur, it takes about 3-5 boots and/or removing and reseating to get it to work. While not a show stopper, I am definitely not happy about it and it has forced me to look at alternatives. What compounds the problem is that it also occurs in the Advanced Dock with the SATA tray. Both disks test fine in the primary bay and using USB connection. Clearly either there is a power and/or speed issue with these disks using the SATA adapter.

Now, if anyone has recommendations and/or a solution to get this (ie 3Gbps or the 7200.4's as a pair) to work it would be much appreciated. I am not interested in going to a T500 or W500 at present and would much rather wait until the next refresh. Is a bios hack worth investigating?

-Sandy

[jdhurst]

Disappointed you may be, but earlier in this thread, one user did call "fraud". There are other forums for this, but not this one (as far as I understand the rules and the people who manage the forum). So I don't find our actions to be "extreme", rather our actions are intended to keep things on an even keel.
.... JDH

[{ISV-K}SVX]

So I don't find our actions to be "extreme", rather our actions are intended to keep things on an even keel.
.... JDH

Either way you phrase it, deleting/editing one's comments by definition is censorship which is considered extreme (left or right as pertains to Bill's "leftist" comment). While I agree this was not the place for the "fraud" comment, I just think deleting is excessive. Unless it was blatant derogatory, then I think it should be left and the person suspended, banned, etc as it pertains to the rules. You are giving off the appearance of bias in favor of Lenovo and if anyone disagrees they get censored. As you can tell by my purchase track record in my sig, I love TP's. I am simply defending owners rights to express themselves amongst others who share similar frustrations without the fear of retribution. Your forum, your rules I suppose.

Anyway, I am on board more for a resolution to this problem rather than going at odds over the politics of the forum.

[ajkula66]

{ISV-K}SVX wrote:

You are giving off the appearance of bias in favor of Lenovo and if anyone disagrees they get censored. As you can tell by my purchase track record in my sig, I love TP's. I am simply defending owners rights to express themselves amongst others who share similar frustrations without the fear of retribution. Your forum, your rules I suppose.

If you maintain presence on these boards, you'll notice that there has been a ton of criticism towards Lenovo here, without posts being deleted and the users banned, as long as the tone was kept civil and discussion meaningful...which was NOT the case with the user that got banned. And getting on the board with "holier-than-thou" attitude is a pretty awkward way of gathering support for one's cause in my not-so-modest opinion...

Anyway, I am on board more for a resolution to this problem rather than going at odds over the politics of the forum.

And that's exactly the way it's supposed to be...looking for a solution of any problem with a constructive outlook is the only way to get things done IMO...

[{ISV-K}SVX]

Touché!

If I came across as "holier than thou" I apologize, that was not the intention. After reading through this thread there were several posts edited and it really bothered me with such an issue is plaguing myself. I do maintain a presence, however typically only read material pertinent to my situation/s.

Simply put, l agree and staying civil is the only way to reach an accord.

-Sandy

[ajkula66]

{ISV-K}SVX wrote:

If I came across as "holier than thou" I apologize, that was not the intention

Apology is all mine, since I was NOT referring to you, and am sorry it has been understood that way. Your approach was well-mannered and civil IMO, and that's exactly the way I believe it should be when posting on these boards...

[carbon_unit]

One of the moderators jobs is to keep order around here. We try to maintain an adult learning and sharing environment here to resolve problems and help others. All members agree to this when they sign up but some decide they don't want to follow the rules they agreed to and when they go too far they get the boot.
Please remember that this is not an "Official" Lenovo forum and is run by enthusiasts, for enthusiasts. We have no pull at Lenovo what so ever. Polluting this forum with inflammatory posts will not resolve any problem but will only pollute this forum.
As far as this thread goes, Only the posts which were threatening were deleted. Play by the rules and remain calm and the posts will remain here forever.
I didn't do any of the deleting but I do agree with the actions taken on those particular posts. They had no place here.

[dsvochak]

hellosailor and Daniel make interesting points. Thanks.

For those of us who aren’t using Photoshop or similar software I don’t see how an SSD “can improve performance by several hundred percent”. I bill at what is probably considered an “expensive hourly rate”. My limiting productivity factor isn’t how fast an application loads--it’s how fast I can think and how fast I (or the secretary) can type.

Also, after reading the articles referenced (along with other articles) I have questions whether, in the current state of technology, an SSD would make my notebook more reliable.

At current prices, the cost/benefit analysis of an SSD v a normal HD doesn’t make me want to buy an SSD.

[gene303]

I woud like to remind everyone that the maximum sequential rate is mostly useless. Unless youre copying huge files all night and day, you probably won't care if your photoshop file loads in 1.5 seconds or 3 seconds. In fact you've just spent more time reading this thread than all the time you would have potentially saved loading photoshop files on a drive capable of doing 240mb/sec read.

FURTHERMORE, if you are looking for real world performance, look at the latency and maximum i/o operations per second that the drive is capable of. This is much more of an indicator for the type of REAL-WORLD performance gain you will get. If you've cancelled your SSD order because of this thread, you should probably think twice about it.

As one poster has pointed out, the real world difference will be minor. The real gold here is the seek time and the maximum i/o operations per second. Low latency and high i/o lead to a great snappy machine for multitasking and doing database work.

[Marin85]

I woud like to remind everyone that the maximum sequential rate is mostly useless. Unless youre copying huge files all night and day, you probably won't care if your photoshop file loads in 1.5 seconds or 3 seconds. In fact you've just spent more time reading this thread than all the time you would have potentially saved loading photoshop files on a drive capable of doing 240mb/sec read.

FURTHERMORE, if you are looking for real world performance, look at the latency and maximum i/o operations per second that the drive is capable of. This is much more of an indicator for the type of REAL-WORLD performance gain you will get. If you've cancelled your SSD order because of this thread, you should probably think twice about it.

As one poster has pointed out, the real world difference will be minor. The real gold here is the seek time and the maximum i/o operations per second. Low latency and high i/o lead to a great snappy machine for multitasking and doing database work.

I couldn´t agree more!

[jketzetera]

I used to share your opinion on the subject (see my post in the thread below)

http://forum.thinkpads.com/viewtopic.ph ... sd#p459750

However, after researching the subject I have learned that running a high-performance SSD in SATA-I mode does not just cap the maximum sequential transfer rates (which are not of that great importance for real world performance) but also effectively halves the random write performance.

Why this happens I have no idea but I am speculating that it is because of a different clock synchronization inside the SSD when running at 1.5Gb/sec instead of 3.0Gb/sec. The halving of the random transfer rates does have a very direct and tangible impact on real world performance.

Therefore the Thinkpad SATA limitation does actually impact the real world performance of your system if you run the Intel X25-M, Intel X25-E or OCZ Vertex.

[Daniel]

I used to share your opinion on the subject (see my post in the thread below)

http://forum.thinkpads.com/viewtopic.ph ... sd#p459750

However, after researching the subject I have learned that running a high-performance SSD in SATA-I mode does not just cap the maximum sequential transfer rates (which are not of that great importance for real world performance) but also effectively halves the random write performance.

Why this happens I have no idea but I am speculating that it is because of a different clock synchronization inside the SSD when running at 1.5Gb/sec instead of 3.0Gb/sec. The halving of the random transfer rates does have a very direct and tangible impact on real world performance.

Therefore the Thinkpad SATA limitation does actually impact the real world performance of your system if you run the Intel X25-M, Intel X25-E or OCZ Vertex.

Any links/benchmarks?

[geohsia]

I find it interesting that this conversation shifted to "perceptible differences" between SATA 3GB/s and SATA 1.5 GB/s. My comments.

a) If there is no perceptible difference then why would they bother increasing the speed and updating the spec. To everyone who wants proof, I say back to you prove to me that there is no difference between the two specs now that SSD's are approaching the theoretical limit of saturating the SATA 3GB/s bus. Prove to me that they wasted their time updating the spec to 3Gb/s, that its somehow the same as 1.5Gb/s

b) I am a photography professional and I bought the T61 because of its durability and longevity (future proof). So far I've been to different countries and so far it's held up well. One of the reasons I bought this was because of SATA 3GB/s and to give you an example, this weekend I shot 9GB worth of RAW, files almost a thousand images. I had to cull through them and I will tell you that I was extremely input/HDD bound. Yes, there is a CPU component but my drive was lit up most of the time as I went from photo to photo. I have tens of thousands of photos in my collections and I will go through different collections regularly and I need every bit of performance my laptop can squeeze out. This is one example of an application that requires a lot of IO. Others have mentioned PS. I think the point here is not everyone uses their computer for the same things and performance varies but clearly it can be a benefit to some.

c) Maybe some people are rich enough to buy the T61(p) series so they can do email and play solitaire. But it seems to me, the people who buy this are people who expect performance and I think its safe to assume that T61(p) users tend to be performance users can benefit from it performing the way it is spec'ed.

d) To those who say we should get something else, I'm glad you have discretionary income but I don't have it. If you're willing to share, I'm happy to shop. Until then I'm trying to make the most of what I have.

Everyone's time has a different value. Some are willing to spend a few hundred dollars on a SSD HDD so they can get back a few minutes/hours/days. That's their right as a consumer. Why should we not get what we paid for? The specs say 3.0 GB/s, so I don't think its unfair or unreasonable to ask Lenovo to live up to their claims and deliver what they stated.

I hope this gets resolved in a timely manner.

George

[aceo07]

I have an X61t and was also looking for a solution to this limitation. Nice SSDs are out and 'affordable' now. Vista currently takes ages to load to logon screen for me. Probably at least 5 minutes if not more. Cutting it to half would be great. I also do software development and have a few virtual machines on the laptop. The hdd is currently the slowest part and is holding up everything else. The hdd is usually just reading/writing and the cpu usage is 10% or less.

This is my 4th and newest thinkpad. It was meant to be futureproof for a while. Thinkpad, great SXGA+ screen, tablet, AND sata-ii. The only part that would be useful for upgrades was the sata-ii. This is a HUGE disappointment to me since I was planning to upgrade to a blazing fast SSD when it got cheaper. Would I have not bought it last autumn if I knew about this limitation? Most likely yes.

The speed difference matters a lot for tasks that are mostly drive intensive. For opening a browser or watching a movie, you probably wouldn't notice much difference. Why would I do anything intensive on my laptop? Because it has a fast processor and it needs to be utilized.

Let's hope there's a great official solution, but it may be too late in the game for that...

[Rochefort]

May be,we've to wait the new models coming with Windows Seven !??
My X25E tops at 135 M/s writing&reading with my old beloved T60 15' 4/3 IPS .
Anyway SSD is a real pleasure and can be used for my next SATA II ThinkPad

[aceo07]

May be,we've to wait the new models coming with Windows Seven !??
My X25E tops at 135 M/s writing&reading with my old beloved T60 15' 4/3 IPS .
Anyway SSD is a real pleasure and can be used for my next SATA II ThinkPad

You put an X-25E in the SATA crippled T60?? You sure treat your laptop extra nice.

I was considering the OCZ Vertex for my X61t. I would consider a newer Thinkpad in the future, but I don't like their new widescreen lcds. I like my screen to have enough vertical space since I'm a software developer.

[Rochefort]

You put an X-25E in the SATA crippled T60?? You sure treat your laptop extra nice.

I love so much my T60 4/3 IPS !
A Vertex would be a very good deal

[Marin85]

You put an X-25E in the SATA crippled T60?? You sure treat your laptop extra nice.

I was considering the OCZ Vertex for my X61t. I would consider a newer Thinkpad in the future, but I don't like their new widescreen lcds. I like my screen to have enough vertical space since I'm a software developer.

If I had a T60(p) with 15'' IPS screen, I would do that too Regarding screens, I believe only Panasonic still has models with classic aspect ratio 4:3 screens. Everything else are widescreens.

[Troels]

[..]the SATA crippled T60??[..]

Was it in fact crippled to ATA-133 speeds, or what did Lenovo exactly do here with the T60/p?
Even if that was the case that's a rather small trade-off compared to the T61/p - but nevertheless still just as wrong, if it was advertised otherwise.

[jketzetera]

Actually, in the case of the T60 (and other 60-series Thinkpads) no fault lies with IBM/Lenovo as it is only the desktop variant of the ICH-7 chipset that supports 3.0 Gb/sec. The T60 runs the mainbay through native SATA port at 1.5 Gb/sec.

[Rochefort]

it is only the desktop variant of the ICH-7 chipset that supports 3.0 Gb/sec.

Really
Is it possible to use it in a T60 and what's the version must be downloaded !?

[lawlen2]

I looked into what you said aobut the desktop varient of the ich7 chipset and I believe you are correct, only the desktop version supports sata300. That does not excuse Lenovo because they advertise the T60p i have as having sata300 capability. I am very certain of this as I confirmed it before purchasing my T60p. I picked up the phone and asked. My T60p is three years old this May and I will begin deciding how I want to replace it. Lenovo should understand if selling me another Thinkpad is an uphill battle for them. This is because they mislead me during the purchase of my T60p. This misleading of the sata spec was really a low class move.