Does the Late 2009 iMac i7 have dual channel SATA II?

I know there is a 3Gb/s SATA2 connection to the internal HD and a separate 3G SATA connection to the optical drive. But are those two SATA connections on separate channels?


To clarify, I am wondering if I can get greater than 3G speeds in a late 2009 iMac by putting an SSD in the HDD slot and another SSD in the optical drive slot. If there are 2 channels, then I would have the theoretical capability of a 6G SSD if I put the two in a RAID configuration.


Thanks.

iMac, OS X Yosemite (10.10), Late 2009, 2.8GHz i7, 16GB RAM

Posted on Nov 13, 2015 11:00 PM

Reply
66 replies

Jan 20, 2016 4:18 PM in response to Switch900

Interesting though how much faster the 1TB SSD inside the SkyLake iMac17,1 is relative to your Mac Pro:

User uploaded file


While I agree that the Mac Pro is built to better keep heat under control (and shame on Apple for not making iMacs of the past last longer in that regard), the Mac Pro is just not affordable for the common man. Indeed, I would say it is "outrageously priced," especially when you consider it's 2013 tech. And although it is compact, it's still not as upgradeable as Mac Pro's of the past.


Once CPU tech reaches the end of Moore's Law (5nm tech in 2020?), computer makers like Apple are going to need to do something else to keep performance moving. And there's no way that will happen in a badly cooled box. And yet, most people cannot afford the Mac Pro. So Apple's hand will be forced to "think different" around that time.

Jan 20, 2016 8:17 PM in response to JDW1

yeah it does, show very very similar numbers, but I don't want to deal down the line with a iMac heating oven. That ssd is amazingly fast the one inside the iMac I just wish they stop putting so much physical drives and look into more of a cooler design for the components. The heat is a major issue they should be worry not everyone is made of money this has set me back with a loan and a computer that has two year old tech which is sadly, because they are most likely to put the skylake Xeon cpu and newer graphics card. The Mac Pro temp is way lower at high intense application use and still to manage to keep cool at temps which is like a summer season, mind you my apt now at room temp is at 24 Celsius and the Mac Pro entirely is running at 30 to 35 Celsius

Jan 20, 2016 8:25 PM in response to JDW1

about the write speed on the iMac that is insane, how much cooler does it run. And plus to push a 5K panel with a graphics card that has to work double the performance always because with the high en graphics card with 4 gigs of vram the top of the line iMac 5k is very pricey and it's even harder to upgrade, yes the Mac Pro before 2013 was much more upgradable than this one but apple theory is to make things more compact and proprietary to them fixing them also for a certain time span once that time span support is over your crapped out with a machine that they won't fix like the iMac I had for so many years which worked fine till now and I would still have by now also if it did not break down on me.

Jan 20, 2016 8:30 PM in response to Switch900

I should mention the difference between my late 2009 iMac11,1 (at home) and my new Skylake 5K iMac17,1 (at work). I believe you said your iMac that had the video card that died was just like mine — a 2009 iMac11,1. Those get very hot, especially in the upper left corner. That's why I have a USB fan blowing on that corner at all times in the warmer months of the year. I read that the 1st gen 5K iMac ran hot, but my use of the new Skylake iMac17,1 shows that Apple has made some improvements.


My room temp is 15°C right now.

CPU is running at 39.5°.

GPU is running at 46.0°.

Fan is running at the base speed of 1200rpm.


It stays that way, when the room temp stays the same, unless I am editing video or compressing video. Work in graphics apps doesn't seem to affect it much at all. I don't play games, but I would assume that would heat it up pretty fast.


All said, even the current 5K Skylake iMac17,1 won't beat the Mac Pro in terms of heat control. But the new iMac is a world apart from the iMac11,1 I have at home. That remains true even though I swapped my iMac11,1's internal HDD for a Samsung EVO 850 SSD. It's a little cooler, but not a lot cooler.

Jan 20, 2016 9:16 PM in response to JDW1

I Notice the same when I swapped the Hdd for a ssd the machine ran much cooler but not as much and when I did the raid 0 with the iMac it even ran much faster but when render video the machine got intensely hot but still the temp numbers ran pretty **** high not good for the components. I do wish I could trust the new sky lake iMac but I am just over the fact that I have had two iMacs and both did not give me good results. I hope with the new gen iMac they learn a lot more from previous. Yesterday when I was picking up the Mac Pro another guy came in with an iMac with the same issue the graphics card. he definitely look worry, and I wish he did not have to go through what I went through because being left hanging with a broken computer and apple not fixing it hurts the pocket when you have to think about your data and investment to know that just a fix would keep you from opening your wallet for a more expensive computer. Since 2009 till now apple computer has gone up 100 percent from the 2009 prices they had back then, mind you when I got my iMac I got it top of the line, and look where I have ended. I am very glad with my new Mac Pro and very surprise how all the components sensors show much cooler and even consistent numbers which is what I like the most of the Mac Pro. I would imagine with the new Xeon sky lake coming soon the Mac Pro will have a much faster performance but maybe they will have to make the fan spin at a much higher speed when idle. The fan on the Mac Pro runs at 740 rpm and it is dead on cool I have not seen it rise to 900 yet but I did some video and audio with it yesterday and I was very happy with the results it ran cool at all times 30 Celsius the only thing that was on 40 Celsius was the ssd drive and I am thinking because it's on top of one of the gpu.

Feb 5, 2016 2:11 PM in response to JDW1

Well I have to update you on my Mac Pro on the ssd pci disk well that Mac Pro had a graphic flickering problem which I have no idea how a new Mac Pro have a graphics card problem well I have switch that Mac Pro for another one right out of the box and the speed disk on this Mac Pro is way much slower than the first Mac Pro I got, it got me wondering why that disk was so fast and the lower flicking on the screen.

Feb 5, 2016 5:12 PM in response to Switch900

I am shocked to hear that even your first Mac Pro developed a problem, but those SSD speeds of your replacement Mac Pro are unacceptable. You definitely need to talk to Apple about that. Is it really "Pro" in light of the problem's you've had? "Cooler components" seems to be the only good thing it has.

Feb 5, 2016 8:38 PM in response to JDW1

This time the graphics card flickering is gone but what shock me that the pcie flash drive is slower than the previous Mac Pro unless that was a newer model and the one I got now is an older model or maybe that pcie flash drive was not the one which was suppose to be in the previous Mac Pro and it was causing the graphics card to flicker. The last mac Pro came with El Capitan this one came with Mavericks. Who knows maybe that one was built with recent components and the one I have now has older components. I do know that running the same process I did, like ttranscoding and rendering this machine acts more stable than the previous one.

Feb 5, 2016 8:48 PM in response to Switch900

It seems you are buying a used machine, perhaps on an auction site like EBAY? That would explain the older OS, flickering graphics and perhaps even slow SSD. That would also explain why the Mac Pro was somewhat affordable for you, since buying new would surely cost much more than what you paid.


Curious if Apple will release a new Mac Pro this year. The one you have came out in 2013. Regardless, it still will not be as affordable as the iMac. But at least with the latest hardware, someone out there might be able to justify the high price of keeping electronics cool. For now, my SkyLake iMac at the office is running fine at 39°C most of the time. The fan runs at 1200rpm, which is faster than the 700rpm of the Mac Pro, but I cannot heard the iMac's fan at 1200rpm. And the 5K screen is drop dead gorgeous.


The only other thing I will add is that Intel is up against a wall on CPU development. I've been using Macs since the 128k in 1984 and I can tell you that the huge leaps in CPU performance we'd see almost every year in the past are now gone. SkyLake runs cooler that prior chips, but performance is the same or worse than Broadwell. And upcoming CPUs look to be just as lackluster. It's questionable whether Apple will ever run Macs on its A-series chips, but even then we reasonable cannot expect them to best Intel, unless Apple rewrites code specific to A-class chips in something like Assembly Language (which isn't going to happen, even though that's what Apple did in the early days of the Mac). No, performance will probably only keep trucking along with more advanced GPUs and GPU-accelerated code. Very few companies are taking advantage of that now. If more companies, Apple included, took full advantage of GPU power, the Mac Pro should easily trounce the iMac in most tests. But as it stands now, the iMac trounces the "Pro."


Anyway, I hope you get the SSD troubles sorted out. The speeds you posted are not "slow" in terms of spinning platter hard drives, but they are slow relative to your earlier Mac Pro and especially slow compared to the Skylake iMac.


Best wishes.

Feb 5, 2016 10:13 PM in response to JDW1

I Just thought that it was very odd that one machine has a slower pcie flash drive and the first Mac Pro I got which I had to replace because of the funny lower screen flickering. Maybe it was the newer version of the pcie flash storage which made the graphic card flicker. All in all the numbers on the reads and write of the flash drive are in the norms of numbers after watching some YouTube videos they do range in those numbers. But I was shock to see how fast the one I had before. It could be hardware or even OSX bugs too. Nothing is clear what I do know that you could do some rigorous testing by using fcpx and do heavy transcoding and you will see that the skylake iMac will thermal throttle. Last night I did some heavy cpu and gpu testing to see if there will be some sort of failure and to be honest this machine is more stable than the first Mac Pro I got. I will continue to do heavy loads on this machine. But last night it was impossible to thermal throttle it. I will try today to see if I could rev her up to thermal throttle with longer video transcoding and rendering.

This thread has been closed by the system or the community team. You may vote for any posts you find helpful, or search the Community for additional answers.

Does the Late 2009 iMac i7 have dual channel SATA II?

Welcome to Apple Support Community
A forum where Apple customers help each other with their products. Get started with your Apple Account.