Macbook 4.1 Chipset ICH8-M limited to 1.5 Gbits?

[Im-Mortal]

I have a mavbook 4.1 and I have noticed that macbook is limiting itself to the SATA chipset, now these days with the introduction of the SSD and all I think they all must start with the firmware upgrade so that they can give rise to more possibilities. If I am thinking of adding an SSD to my system of course the performance of my system will be clamped because of the unavailable update from the apple. well I wanted to discuss this matter with you all and hence I started this thread for you all so do start sending in your suggestions guys.

[Mindstorm]

Yes I completely agree with you they haven’t sent an update of this chipset since 3years now. With this limitation we cannot upgrade out system with the new hard drive or a SSD, so even i support this thread and I think apple people must give a firmware upgrade as soon as possible since it really hampers the performance in our system, now with the introduction of the next Mac OS X Lion, this limitation we leave the key.

[Howitzer]

That’s absolutely correct with the current chip my SSD speeds have been hampered, the current chip that my macbook 3.1 has the capacity of running SATA 2, but no, Apple artificially wants it to limit it up to SATA 1.5. well the actual speed with my current SSD should be anywhere around 250 MB/s but at the current state it is giving me a speed of 130 MB/s. so that’s a pretty bad figure for me, so guys count me as well who want an firmware upgrade from the apple as soon as possible.

[Felix46]

I am totally opposite in the opinions that you all have said well if you ask me then what I will say is that apple has done a lot of work to keep the power use and also the errors in check so whatever they have done till now I think that’s perfect why are you all not satisfied with the hard disk I am totally satisfied with the service it has given me so that’s what I was saying I am totally satisfied with the apple and hence thanks for all the suggestions that you have given here.

[mathews]

Well the thing behind not updating the firmware upgrade is that if apple thinks of firmware upgrade, it would require replacing the optical drive. In case the SATA controller runs at full speed, there is a possibility that the optical drive would be broken. So for the safety apple people are sticking to the safer side they are considering the slower but safer solution with their present hardware they are having and I hope majority of the people must have got enough information on the same.

[Im-Mortal]

Ok understood what you all were trying to say it to me I am happy that you all did gave me some information on that and I was not knowing about it so thanks for reminding about that anyways appreciate your efforts for doing some research kind of stuff for me. So thanks a lot for all your genuine help and i am seriously hoping that this matter is listened by every concerned apple people and i wish that they reply it soon to me.

[0ldspeak]

Hello,

I have a...

MacBook4,1 / Intel Core 2 Duo / 2.4 GHz

running a...

Hitachi 300G / 7200 RPM / SATA 3Gb/s

Through the Macbook Pro Chipset...

Intel / ICH8-M AHCI / 1.5 Gigabit

which I belive is the same configuration as the...

June 2009 MacBook Pro

and was corrected with the...

MacBook Pro EFI Firmware Update 1.7

http://support.apple.com/downloads/M...re_Update_1_7_

Can anybody provide additional information please? Is there NO solution or can somebody please repost when they hear of one? I'd like to upgrade to an SSD that I can transition into a Pro in a year or so.

Any response appreciated

[Onitsuj]

Is there still no solution?? I have the a macbook pro 4.1 as well
and i bought a SSD i hope to use it at his full capacity.

Kind regards Justin

[ApPy10]

Is there still no solution?? I have the a macbook pro 4.1 as well
and i bought a SSD i hope to use it at his full capacity.

Till now, apple hasnt released any patch to utilize the full capacity of the ssd's running @ more than 3.0 Gbit/s level. You can however send them a feedback about same at their feedback column, so that they will come to know about the repeatedly requesting queries and hopefully work on same issue.