I Might Be Onto Something Here!

I started to notice a couple of weeks ago that my MK2 was running very quick, alot quicker than it normally runs with the Intel SSD in it. I ran a Benchmark on Sunday and was shocked to see it is running in SATA 2.0! However, I can't remember what I did to get it to do this. I have some other guys on another Forum that are trying to help me figure it out. When I do I will let you guys know for sure. It is really amazing the difference in the response of everything. I thought everything ran fast before, but now it is simply.......Orgasm**

 

SATA 2? You mean SATA 2 by 3.0GBP/s yes?

Isn't the CF-31 SATA 6.0GBp/s?

Thanks

 

Yes they are. However I am talking about my MK2 and MK3.

 

Yes - id love to know how you did this. I have been experiencing monumental issues trying to get my CF F8 to run at SATA II speeds using my SSD drive....

How did you do that?

I have upgraded the BIOS and tested on other traditional drives and still it is always limited to old school SATA I - is there any reason why this is?

THANKS!

 

How do you measure it? Just benchmark data rates, or is there some other tip off? A lurking spec sheet? Pre-sale, I was told SATA 1 for the CF 31.

 

Your notation is wrong.

It's Gbit/s, your "B" is indicating Bytes.

o.g.

 

How long are your boot times? Does it boot up fast enough for you? Do the programs pop or open right up when you click on them? If the answer is yes, then you don't need to worry about the high read and write times.

 

Ssssshhhh... Windoze will hear your praise and turn ornery again. You know it's only happy when you're b!tchin' about it...

mnem
no.

 

Is this true the CF-31 is SATA 3???

 

My 31 runs full steam ahead.

 

Hi, How you made this? I have CF-30 MK3 with new SSD 128GB but in SATA150 mode

 

as far as I know he never figured it out...He (Toyo) has not been around for a little over a year now.

 

As far as I know it's a registry hack....one that produces a corresponding increase in heat load & a reduction in battery life.

 

Do you know how to make it?

 

The failure rates of CF-30's are around 1.4% against an Industry average of 15%. this is partly achieved by reducing the amount of I/O operations resulting in a cooler system with better battery life. :hi2:

You've not indicated what drive you are using or what applications you need to run....those interested in maximum bandwidth tend to prefer something other than the known reliability & limitations of the Fully Rugged Toughbook. :thumbsup:

 

I'm using my CF-30 for work (email, MS Office, internet, data storage, graphics editing...) and also for fun (movies, music, games...). It's good thing to have extra performance on wire and long battery life when I'm outside.
My SSD SanDisk should have read 250 MB/s and write 200 MB/s and I will be satisfied. Now is only R:120 MB/s W:100 MB/s.

Someone is also using CF-30 with SSD drive?

 

I don't see any proves of it... anybody?
Just someone wrote WOW, YOU WON'T BELIEVE! and people came like flies.

If you really got sata2 then clone whole C drive and tell here what you have done.

 

I have been using the Inel SSD in my CF-30 MK1 for at least a year now and it is fast. Got a 120GB that's going in my 30MK2 soon

 

And what is your speed R/W??

 

I think you are right. There was BIG WOW and now is silence.
Hey guys, share your results in AS SSD Benchmark and we compare them.

 

My result on TOUGHBOOK CF-30K (MK3)

 

That I could not tell you , never did check but I can tell you it went from 50 seconds into windows to 27-31 seconds into windows. I have 12 Toughbooks that have SSD's in them from 40GB to 240GB (CF-19, 29, 30, 52 and 53) and well worth every penny. Try it and you will see.BTW I am running W7 on all of them but the 29.

 

I know more is better, often, but why do you need 250/200 and is 120/100 not enough? Often the SSD isn't the slowest point, but often the wifi/usb connection slows you down. So unless you do a lot of rendering or other data-write/read intensive tasks, why is 120/100 not enough?
I don't even know how much the speed is with my 600Gb intel 320, I just know it's a blazing fury when compared to the old HDD that was inside.

 

I'll throw the cat amongst the pigeons.

Intel 80GB G2 in a CF-30Mk2....sequential writes on the 80GB are capped compared to the higher capacity G2 drives.



Does this look good....is it the start of a tale of woe?.

 

Hmm... Much faster than mine SSD. Maybe mine SSD is faulty. I don't know where is problem. What version of BIOS do you have?

 

You need to compare "apples with apples".

The benchmarks above were posted by Toyo in another thread so comparing a Mk2 with a different Bios to a Mk3 will be of limited use. If you go back to page 1 of this thread he explains that implementing "hacks" has resulted in a performance increase....he doesn't know which one gives the most effect....& he hasn't chimed in with an update on the longer term effects of skating around some of the limitations that Panasonic have implemented in order to achieve the long-term reliability results.

I suspect that the "hack" has prevented the cpu from idling & in doing so gives higher I/O's....so what do we think the long term effects of this will be??. fry an egg on the bottom case maybe??. It could be a good opportunity to invite someone from the i7 Dull or Stinkpad crowd in to explain why their failure rates hit 15%.

In most cases, a Sata-II SSD on a Sata-I interface is only going to achieve Sata-I transfer rates but with the benefit of the attributes posted above with regard to boot times & longer idle cycles allowing cooler running & longer battery life.

Your 4K read/writes of 9MB/s are closer to UDMA-5 so there is a problem somewhere. I would check for any chipset & storage controller driver updates before condemning the drive.


EDIT: lol...Mr i5 Sata-II with his Intel 320 running 250MB/s ask's why you need 250MB/s.

cough*Alecgold*cough.

 

Ouch, that one hurts, George!
But also had to LOL. thanks, this is a good one, I never realised that I have SATA II and the 250Mb/s. And even so I was thinking this morning how much time it costs to copy 300.000 files / 7Gb from a SSD to an external SSD. I now do this through a USB3 ExpressCard but it still takes a lot of time.

 

i thought 19mk5 already had one USB 3.0 port.
I suggest you create a RAM drive (4GB allocated), make an archive (ZIP, TAR, etc) directly to that ram drive with ~half the files, copy it over to the external (ssd) drive and repeat for the remainder of the files; You'll have sequential speed (which should be ~30-35MB/s over USB 2.0 or many times that on USB 3.0, in your case.
The USB protocol overhead is a pain for copying very many small files.

One other, and more elegant/fast solution, is to directly connect your external SSD driver over (e)SATA. Find a good Expresscard (e)SATA card, and hook it up for direct transfer.

 

i know of a reg hack that speeds things up a bit, you can try (at your own risk) if you want
hack below

HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SYSTEM\CurrentControlSet\Servic es\Intelppm - changed "Start" value from "3" to "4"


steven

 

It's the new mk6 that has one usb3 port, but I'm not going to buy a mk6 just to get a usb3 port, no even not I.

I have had very dissapointed experiences with e-sata drives and the usb 3 is doing allright. And I expect usb3 to grow and esata is still a bit of an odd duck. Oddly enough I prefer ethernet connections, they are easy, cheap and available. Every computer still has one, altough a lot of ultrabooks only have a usb-ethernet controler, but I'm not such a fan of ultrabooks, even though they can look stunning. Even worse IMHO, cloud-books....

 

i know what you mean, I feel the same; wire is fastest/cheapest/most reliable/most secure; a gigabit connection, available on (all) most computers for over a decade .
in your case though, I assume you backup to an external drive, not a remote backup machine.

sorry for diverting the topic here.

 

Hi guys,

I decided to change my SanDisk SSD to OCZ Vertex 4 128GB.
Now it's better :-]

 

Hmmm....a lot better than a CF-29....I think you might be onto something here....





EDIT: lol....Alec(Usain Bolt)gold. :thumbsup: