My SSD Only Supports 500MB's Read and 175 MB's Write!


Recommended Posts

kevpan815: dude, if everyone but you says that you are wrong they are usually right. Take your machine to a mac store and get them to put the new ssd in it. Stop freaking out about drive speeds and your warranty period.

Extra note:

lol this guy. I'm such a lurker but this is (almost) worth a post.

Check the original thread here: https://www.neowin.net/forum/topic/1123472-finally-placed-my-order-for-an-ssd-from-crucialcom

He can't be arsed to change the hard drive himself or take it to the mac store for fear of his warranty running out and now he is freaking out about read/write speeds claiming that the ssd is designed for external use because it came with a usb cable.

I say just leave it. There's no point asking a question if you won't accept the answer.

kevpan815: dude, if everyone but you says that you are wrong they are usually right. Take your machine to a mac store and get them to put the new ssd in it. Stop freaking out about drive speeds and your warranty period.

Extra note:

lol this guy. I'm such a lurker but this is (almost) worth a post.

Check the original thread here: http://www.neowin.ne...from-crucialcom

He can't be arsed to change the hard drive himself or take it to the mac store for fear of his warranty running out and now he is freaking out about read/write speeds claiming that the ssd is designed for external use because it came with a usb cable.

I say just leave it. There's no point asking a question if you won't accept the answer.

This and this, as others said before about USB 2.0 and the whole shenanigan about MBps and Mbps, they're correct :/

You are not getting full speed out of your SSD when it's connected via USB2. It is impossible, but since you just ignore what everyone's saying then it's pointless.

Do some benchmarks and learn the difference between a megabit and a megabyte. You'll soon see you're completely wrong if you bother to take the time to listen. People are just trying to advise you that the way you're using your newly purchased SSD is useless as USB2 is crippling it. If you don't want to take anyone's advice and learn then it's pointless even posting.

Is this the guy who paid USD 200 for a RAM upgrade?

I think he is just insane. Lock thread and ban.

Well that is pretty uncalled for. Everyone has to learn somewhere no?

Granted, from what I have seen in this thread and other threads that were linked to in this thread, the OP seems pretty adamant on not wanting to learn and insisting they are right, however if they are just able to accept the fact that most people are in fact here to help those who are looking to help themselves, well as I said, they can actually learn a whole lot if they so choose to do so.

With that said, comments like this one do not really help matters, and in fact, they probably make them worse. Just saying, it was pretty damn unnecessary to say, even if you do think it is the truth. Just proves that the old adage "if you do not have anything nice to say, do not say anything at all" also applies to the internet, even if people feel like they can say whatever they choose to another human being as they are behind the safety and anonymity of their IP address/monitor.

I am sure I just wasted my time posting this, but I felt it need to be said, and it also does apply to a few other responses in this thread. Sometimes people are just downright cruel. And as I said I do admit, it seems as though the OP does not want the help even though there are those offering it, however that is their loss, no need to fuel the flames and gang up on them.

  • Like 3

Where are you people coming up with 480 Mbps = 35 MB/s because your math is way waaaaaaaaaaay off.

Bytes = 8 bits, hence 480 Mbps aka Million bits per second divided by 8 = ~60 MBps aka Million bytes per second (that's the absolute theoretical maximum but because of overhead it's never that fast). Even though it can't push ~60MB/s perfectly that's still a very big jump from 35MB/s which you folks keep spitting out as though it were accurate to any degree.

USB 2.0 is theoretically capable of ~55-58MB/s sustained transfer speed if there are no other devices on the particular USB controller.

The OP simply made a booboo of sorts, I could tell that from reading the post he made - the rest of the posts hence have been basic garbage overall and a lot of misunderstandings and mistaken values for the potential, theoretical, and even real-world performance of USB 2.0.

Better luck next time people, and don't go so far off-track will ya?

Where are you people coming up with 480 Mbps = 35 MB/s because your math is way waaaaaaaaaaay off.

Bytes = 8 bits, hence 480 Mbps aka Million bits per second divided by 8 = ~60 MBps aka Million bytes per second (that's the absolute theoretical maximum but because of overhead it's never that fast). Even though it can't push ~60MB/s perfectly that's still a very big jump from 35MB/s which you folks keep spitting out as though it were accurate to any degree.

USB 2.0 is theoretically capable of ~55-58MB/s sustained transfer speed if there are no other devices on the particular USB controller.

The OP simply made a booboo of sorts, I could tell that from reading the post he made - the rest of the posts hence have been basic garbage overall and a lot of misunderstandings and mistaken values for the potential, theoretical, and even real-world performance of USB 2.0.

Better luck next time people, and don't go so far off-track will ya?

because USB isn't a 1:1 translation in speed

quote from wikipedia since I don't feel like writing a full description myself right now

USB 2.0: Released in April 2000. Added higher maximum signaling rate of 480 Mbit/s (effective throughput up to 35 MB/s or 280 MBit/s) (now called "Hi-Speed"). Further modifications to the USB specification have been done via Engineering Change Notices (ECN). The most important of these ECNs are included into the USB 2.0 specification package available from USB.org:[13]

and from tech republic

4: Actual data throughput

Actual data throughput is usually much less than the maximum advertised USB specification and is a function of many variables, including overhead. Actual throughput in practice is typically up to 35 - 40MB/sec for USB 2.0 and may exceed 400MB/sec for USB 3.0. NEC recently demonstrated its new USB 3.0 controller transferring 500MB in 4.4 seconds or ?only? 113.6MB/sec. Symwave and MCCI claim to have demonstrated over 270MB/sec data throughput at the Intel Developer Forum in September 2009.

sorry, but the rest of the posts aren't "garbage" but a bunch of people that realize there is more to the USB spec then what you are told you get...

so, the OP pm'd me and said he fried his system and it's somehow our fault

all i have to say is he obviously didn't follow the links with step by step directions we gave him very well

Can anyone forward me the PM from him....I'd love to read them. I have loved reading this thread....it's been a treat.

here's the two PMs i got from him

all the first pm said was "I now have a dead system and it's your guys fault"

second one said

The Drive does NOT even fit in my system, Just FYI! Now I have to save up $599.99 + Tax just so I can replace the system itself, and that does NOT include the fact that at some later point in time I will have to pay $149 for Apple Care, and $69.99 for an External Super Drive! Thanks a lot!

edit: and i just got a reply after asking why he doesn't take it to an apple store

No, that will NOT work, I used Pliers to undo all those Non Removable Bolts in the System, I just plain am going to have to save up $599 U.S.A. Dollars from my January Public Aid Paycheck (Social Security Disability) and buy a Late 2012 Mac Mini which will have USB 3.0 Ports on it. There are scratches on the system from where I was using the Pliers and that will most definitely Void my Warrenty. I also damaged the Heat Sync while trying to get the HDD out of the system. I am just plain going to have to buy a new system after the Holiday's!

he tried to use pliers to remove the bolts around the hard drive and ruined the heat sync. he brought it upon himself for not using the correct tools

here's the two PMs i got from him

all the first pm said was "I now have a dead system and it's your guys fault"

second one said

edit: and i just got a reply after asking why he doesn't take it to an apple store

he tried to use pliers to remove the bolts around the hard drive and ruined the heat sync. he brought it upon himself for not using the correct tools

That is sweet.

he tried to use pliers to remove the bolts around the hard drive and ruined the heat sync. he brought it upon himself for not using the correct tools

This thread. :|

All those years that I did tech support and fixed computers...had no idea what was really out there.

just a reminder of the link we gave him with instructions on replacing the hard drive http://www.ifixit.co...lacement/3113/1

he probably completely ignored the link back when it was posted and never even clicked on it

here's the two PMs i got from him

all the first pm said was "I now have a dead system and it's your guys fault"

second one said

edit: and i just got a reply after asking why he doesn't take it to an apple store

he tried to use pliers to remove the bolts around the hard drive and ruined the heat sync. he brought it upon himself for not using the correct tools

Dear god :s , OP is probably PMing people because of all the bad comments. If someone can get through OP's head then that'll be great; other than that, this thread is just giving everyone lols :/

Look, the OP came here to gloat, not looking for advice. He seems happy with his setup in his own roundabout way and he probably wouldn't be able to tell the different between running off an SSD and running off a FDD.

The truth is that he doesn't need the power because his computational needs are basic (not running any intensive apps), and he just likes to play around with Operating Systems and keeping his prized Apple hardware intact, as this is all just his hobby.

I have seen from previous threads that he has a mental illness. So guys cut him some slack, it's not easy living with a mental illness. He is quite happy with this setup and he is getting satisfactory performance to him.

If he feels the need in the future to go even faster, he can make the decision for himself to do the upgrade when his Mac Mini is out of warranty and then he will have nothing to lose .

(personally I would just do the upgrade now and keep the original drive spare for warranty purposes, and switch it back if I needed to send it in, as the Mac Minis are dead simple to work on unlike all other Apple hardware and it is the one thing you can easily take apart without breaking anything).

WRONG! IT IS GETTING ALMOST FULL SPEED AS IT IS GETTING 480 MB'S A SECOND OUT OFF 500 MB'S A SECOND!

I EVEN PLAYED STAR TREK D-A-C (FROM THE MAC APP STORE) YESTERDAY AND HAD NO PROBLEMS WHATSOEVER!

Well done sir, youve invented a new performance bandwidth for USB 2, your confusing Megabits with Megabytes, even a SATAIII SSD struggles to hit 480Mb (megaBYTES)/sec Read/writes on SATAIII/USB 3.0

you should come up with an aftermarket solution, you could make millions selling it to users with usb 2 but want usb3 speeds.

Edited by Intrinsica
Removed offensive word.

This thread ought to be locked and the OP's posts largely ignored, just like those of a certain banned member with the initials A.B.

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • Qualcomm takes on NVIDIA with new Dragonfly CPU and AI chips by Pradeep Viswanathan Microsoft, Google, Amazon, AMD, Meta, Apple, OpenAI, and several others have been developing their own chips for AI infrastructure. However, NVIDIA still remains the dominant player in the market. Today, Qualcomm announced a major expansion of its data center infrastructure portfolio to better compete with NVIDIA. The new lineup includes the Qualcomm Dragonfly C1000 CPU, Qualcomm High Bandwidth Compute technology, the Dragonfly AI300 inference accelerator, new connectivity products, and custom silicon solutions. Qualcomm claims that this new lineup improves performance per watt, token throughput, and total cost of ownership for AI data centers. The Dragonfly C1000 is a new data center CPU built with Qualcomm’s custom Oryon cores. This chip will feature more than 250 cores, frequencies above 5GHz, and a chiplet-based design. Qualcomm claims that this new C1000 can deliver more than 2x better performance per watt compared to existing server CPU offerings based on specifications. The Dragonfly C1000 will support PCIe Gen 7 with more than 2TB/s of connectivity, along with CXL, advanced RAS features, and both air and liquid cooling. Qualcomm expects the Dragonfly C1000 to be commercially available in 2028. Additionally, Qualcomm and Meta announced a multi-year, multi-generation agreement under which Qualcomm will supply Dragonfly C1000 data center CPUs for Meta’s next-generation server fleet. Qualcomm also announced High Bandwidth Compute, a new near-memory computing architecture designed to address AI’s memory bandwidth bottleneck. HBC Gen 1 will debut with the Dragonfly AI250, which is expected to sample in mid-2027. The AI250 will deliver 133TB/s per card, an 18x increase in effective memory bandwidth compared to the AI200 with LPDDR5X. The new Dragonfly AI300 with HBC Gen 2 is a rack-level AI inference platform from Qualcomm. Qualcomm claims that the AI300 can deliver 4x to 8x better performance per watt compared to existing GPU-based architectures based on memory bandwidth per watt per card. The Dragonfly AI300 is expected to be available in 2028.
    • IBM reveals sub-1nm chip technology, production expected in another 5 years by Pradeep Viswanathan TSMC is now leading the chip manufacturing industry with its 2nm-class process node called N2. Samsung Foundry also has a 2nm-class process node called SF2. TSMC says N2 entered volume production in Q4 2025. Samsung says SF2 started mass production in 2025. Today, IBM announced the world’s first sub-1-nanometer chip technology, marking another major semiconductor research milestone. The new technology is based on a 0.7nm, or 7-angstrom, node and uses a new transistor architecture called “nanostack.” The new design vertically stacks and staggers nanosheet-based transistors so that more components can fit into the same chip area while also improving performance and power efficiency. IBM claims that this new sub-1nm chip can pack nearly 100 billion transistors onto a chip the size of a fingernail. This offers almost twice the density, up to 50 percent higher performance, or 70 percent better energy efficiency when compared to IBM's 2nm node design announced back in 2021. Also, IBM mentioned that this new architecture can deliver 40 percent SRAM scaling. It is important to consider that this announcement from IBM is a research milestone rather than a near-term process node launch. Back in 2021, IBM unveiled the world’s first 2nm chip design, claiming 50 billion transistors on a fingernail-sized chip and major performance and efficiency gains. Five years later, IBM’s 2nm technology has still not entered mainstream commercial production. That is because IBM is no longer a major commercial chip manufacturer. It sold its chip manufacturing business to GlobalFoundries years ago and has since then focused only on semiconductor research, IP development, and partnerships. To productize its 2-nm chip technology, IBM partnered with Japan’s Rapidus, but it has not resulted in anything shipping at scale. IBM says that its new sub-1nm technology can reach production as early as within the next five years. If that happens, it will likely depend on manufacturing partners, advanced EUV tooling, and years of yield improvements.
  • Recent Achievements

    • Week One Done
      Meta Plast earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • First Post
      kinowa earned a badge
      First Post
    • Rookie
      krychek57 went up a rank
      Rookie
    • Grand Master
      Jaybonaut went up a rank
      Grand Master
    • One Year In
      Philsl earned a badge
      One Year In
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      454
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      170
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      135
    4. 4
      Michael Scrip
      78
    5. 5
      Xenon
      77
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!