13" MBP SATA interface downgraded to 1.5 Gigabit

i would like to know too. I'm planning to upgrade to SSD. but if it's only 150MB/s i won't spend so much money for it. please answer us apple.

I'd really like to know the answer to this as I was going to upgrade to a SSD drive. Geez, I really hope Apple's not hindering performance on the 13" just because they upgraded it to a Pro. That can't be right.

Blah couldn't login for whatever reason, so had to make another username. anyways, reports over at macrumors are saying that the 2.2Ghz version has the 1.5 interface, while the 2.53Ghz version has the 3.0 interface. *** apple! nowhere on your site did you make this difference known.

I've got a 2.53 Ghz 13" MBP running Seagate 500GB 7200 rpm.

System Profiler reporting 1.5 Gigabit. Hopefuly this is some kind of fixable issue. I wanted to upgrade to an SSD later this year. What are they thinking?

My 13" MBP 2.26ghz is reporting 1.5 gigabit as well.

if you guys can spread the word or hear about a fix, that would be great. general consensus over at macrumors is that everyone is surprised apple would downgrade the interface like this, especially since the previous umb had 3.0

This is lame Apple.

I have both the newest version of Macbook Pro 13", also the macbook 13" (i bought 1 after another 1 week apart)

And It is 100% true, that the new MBP is cap at 1.5g....and the old MBP is at 3g..

I have a OCZ vertext 120g.....and write/read performance really just HALFED!!!!!
This is unbelieveable.....

I have screen shots of HDtune pro for both MB and MBP...and the write/read performance just HALFED from 220 to 100......

Message was edited by: cabbitbunny

Thank you everyone for confirming that this isn't a unit by unit problem. there is a thread dedicated to it over at macrumors if you guys want to follow:

http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=718516

These are the SSD performance HIT that I have took screen shot

This is the OLD MB 13"
http://img30.imageshack.us/img30/7919/83498751.jpg

And this spose to be the NEW one!
http://img30.imageshack.us/img30/2213/26178782.jpg



Message was edited by: cabbitbunny

Message was edited by: cabbitbunny

This has got to be a mistake that Apple can and will fix shortly. I can't believe Apple would degrade a new "Pro" machine like this. If they did, it's very shady and what I'd expect from a used car dealership, not from Apple. I'm sure they'll address it shortly, especially because now it's spreading over the internet.

Well,
I also just got a 13" and installed an Intel X25 drive (160gb) and then stumbled upon this thread. I've called Apple Care to get more information. Waiting to hear back.

In the meantime ran xbench on my machine so I could compare it to other machines and got a score of 198.91. The results for a base 2.53GHz, 4gb RAM, 250gb 5400 drive configuration was also out there on the xbench site and the results for that machine were 137.17. When looking at the read write speeds, with the SSD don't lose anything but on the read side the differences are very dramatic.

This does not answer the question about the limitations of SATA I vs SATA II but at least shows a dramatic increase in the score with the swap in hard drive.

I will update if I get more tech support info

I've posted the results to my test and the one on the xbench site here:

See post #57

http://forum.getdpi.com/forum/showthread.php?p=107802#post107802

Latest early 2008 MBP, 15"/2.53Ghz top-of-the-line --> 1.5Gigabit ... WTH ?

Oh boy. I just "upgraded" my unibody MacBook to a MacBook Pro 13".

And now, after searching the web for an answer to why my system slowed down this much - I find my answer here.. (well, on macrumors to be exact - but I'd like Apple to hear my voice:)

If this is a "feature" added because you want to give us more batterylife, then PLEASE give us a chance to choose. I didn't pay through the nose for my SSD to save on battery - I need the speed..

Thanks in advance!