It's not ideal since it's not an out of the box solution. You have to add the NVMe driver (DXE) to the BootROM.
If you know how to do, you do this in less than 5'. I can add it for you, if you ever need it.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Advice on reliable and affordable SSD for MP 5.1
- Thread starter polanskiman
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
It's not ideal since it's not an out of the box solution. You have to add the NVMe driver (DXE) to the BootROM.
If you know how to do, you do this in less than 5'. I can add it for you, if you ever need it.
Another simple work around is just making a Fusion Drive with a SATA SSD + NVMe SSD, this will also make the whole Fusion Drive bootable. No need to mod the firmware if anyone reluctant to do that.
Thanks. I want to avoid that route. Obviously it makes things cheaper but I suppose problems could arise from this type of setup.
Overall what I want is to go down the route with the least amount of hassle by trying to rip off the max speed as possible. If modding the BootRom is something that is known to be reliable and stable then I might go that way as @tsialex has advised. If not, then I might go for a simple SATA SSD but I think it is a pity to put a 5++MB/s capable SSD to have it run at basically half its speed due to SATA limitations.
[doublepost=1534745504][/doublepost]
Thanks. No I don't know how to but haven't decided which route to take yet.
Last edited:
Thanks. I want to avoid that route. Obviously it makes things cheaper but I suppose problems could arise from this type of setup.
Overall what I want is to go down the route with the least amount of hassle by trying to rip off the max speed as possible. If modding the BootRom is something that is known to be reliable and stable then I might go that way as @tsialex has advised. If not, then I might go for a simple SATA SSD but I think it is a pity to put a 5++MB/s capable SSD to have run at basically half its speed due to SATA limitations.
[doublepost=1534745504][/doublepost]
Thanks. No I don't know how to but haven't decided which route to take yet.
It's reliable and permanent, you will only need to re-do it if Apple releases a new firmware. Since Mac Pros can't be firmware updated without entering Firmware Programming mode, i.e. Apple updates can't install new firmwares on a Mac Pro, you'll never be caught by surprise.
If you want to stick with current SATA drives that don’t require bootrom modification then a cheap adapter like the Debroglie DB-2016 should do and dispenses with wondering where to attach your drive and power it. This is a PCIe x1 adapter so you can eke out a more little performance from a pricier x4 adapter such as the OWC Accelsior.
It is a matter of some debate as this provides that much of a boost over the internal SATA II ports except, obviously, for sequential reads and writes.
Thanks to everyone who has contributed here so far. Great information and advice.
In view of all that has been said I think I have narrowed down my options to the following:
1 - Intel's 660p NVMe + PCIe adaptor (Angelbird Wings / Chinese version / others?)
2 - SSD drive (not sure which brand yet) + PCIe adaptor (Debroglie DB-2016 / OWC Accelsior / others?)
Putting aside the BootRom mod with the NVMe and the obvious speed difference between the two options, which of the above do you think would be the best?
In view of all that has been said I think I have narrowed down my options to the following:
1 - Intel's 660p NVMe + PCIe adaptor (Angelbird Wings / Chinese version / others?)
2 - SSD drive (not sure which brand yet) + PCIe adaptor (Debroglie DB-2016 / OWC Accelsior / others?)
Putting aside the BootRom mod with the NVMe and the obvious speed difference between the two options, which of the above do you think would be the best?
Like I said before, wait 1 month and buy the Intel 660p 1TB for $199. Nothing else has the same ratio of speed/cost.
Thanks. I want to avoid that route. Obviously it makes things cheaper but I suppose problems could arise from this type of setup.
Overall what I want is to go down the route with the least amount of hassle by trying to rip off the max speed as possible. If modding the BootRom is something that is known to be reliable and stable then I might go that way as @tsialex has advised. If not, then I might go for a simple SATA SSD but I think it is a pity to put a 5++MB/s capable SSD to have it run at basically half its speed due to SATA limitations.
[doublepost=1534745504][/doublepost]
Thanks. No I don't know how to but haven't decided which route to take yet.
Again that 500MB/s is just the max sequential speed, rarely use if that’s the only SSD you have. The main idea to go SSD as OS drive is the low latency. Nothing about the sequential speed.
[doublepost=1534751305][/doublepost]
I really want to know what will be the SATA SSD price to make themselves stay competitive.
All I need is just SATA SSD at this moment, the cheaper, the larger, the better. Hopefully those 4TB option will have a price drop becasue of this.
Yes, price wise you are correct but the question above was more technically oriented. Any benefit/drawbacks from the 2 options other than what I already mentionned?
[doublepost=1534751468][/doublepost]
Ok thanks
I really want to know what will be the SATA SSD price to make themselves stay competitive.
Dunno. Isn't the Toshiba TR-200 based on QLC technology? It's priced pretty much the same as TLC drives at similar capacities. Prices will fall for NVMe drives but not sure that remaining SATA drives will fall that much. More likely is that SATA will be phased out.
This! Too much emphasis being placed on the sequential read / write numbers when most people benefit from the random performance which, in many cases, doesn't exceed the Mac Pros SATA-II port. A stock Mac Pro does not contain any source or sink capable of exceeding the SATA-II connection.
If the OP wants a reliable and affordable SSD for the cMP my recommendation is to purchase any of the high quality 2.5" based SATA SSDs. It's about as simple and reliable as it can get.
My recommendation: Avoid the NVMe route - too geeky for my taste. Here are my 0.02 cents to the SSD topic:
For the best adapter I use this:
The second best SSD I use is this: (941 Standard from 2014/15 with AHCI - works native in Mac Pro)
The best SSD, I use this: Samsung (951 Standard from 2015/16 with AHCI works native in Mac Pro)
The best SSD Raid System for both 941 and 951 SSD blades: (I dont use this)
http://amfeltec.com/squid-pci-express-carrier-boards-for-m-2-ssd-modules/?view=list
Benchmarks: (Amfeltec)
http://barefeats.com/hard220.html
Benchmarks: (941 AHCI SSD)
http://barefeats.com/hard183.html
Resume:
If you want fast boot times now and in the future as well as the fastest possible read/write speed on a 2015/2016 Tech level (1500MB/sec), only go for the newest stuff. Most people don't see the long-term future. In 5 years from now, those cards will work in an external PCIe 3-slot Thunderbolt-3 case, connected to an iMac Pro. You for sure don't want to buy a slow SATA SSD now and gimp that slow SSD in the Sonnet box in the future, - having a 500/MB SSD and a super fast TB3 bus that gets bored to death...
https://www.sonnettech.com/product/echoexpressse3.html
The best SATA 2.5" SSD has 1/3 of the 4k write performance of a good PCIe 3.0 4x SSD. The SATA-II versus PCIE connection is not the problem, the problem is that SATA SSD stopped evolution years ago…
By the way, A big Thank you to you Alex on that Bootrom issue. Outstanding work! Your work & opinion is highly valued! My humble thanks to you!
Trying to understand the BootROM corruption on some mid-2012 cMPs, I just found what seems the reason that USB3 cards can't boot in the cMP.
Last edited:
OP, I made this video some time ago. If you happy with this performance. Then a low cost SATA SSD is all you need. Easy and reliable.
But if you feel this is still too slow, then I believe that you really need the top of the line NVMe to see a significant better result than this.
But if you feel this is still too slow, then I believe that you really need the top of the line NVMe to see a significant better result than this.
Agreed the majority of development effort is focused on M.2 solutions. IME a 2.5" SATA-II solution will provide more than acceptable performance for the OP. It is simple, reliable, and inexpensive...exactly the criteria the OP specified.
While I see no reason to avoid an M.2 AHCI solution I would recommend he avoid an M.2 NVMe solution if he wants to use the SSD as a boot drive. IMO the complexity of enabling the cMP to boot an NVMe is not worth the effort for most cMP users.
1) Disable SIP
2) Shutdown
3) Power on with Firmware Programming mode
4) Download the NVMe DXE and ROMTool/DXEInject from dosdude1.com/apps
5) Do a ROM dump with ROMTool, save as MacProOriginal.bin
6) Open terminal and do the injection
Code:
DXEInject MacProOriginal.bin MacProNVME.bin NVMe.ffs8) Reboot
Done.
It's not complex, at least not with today tools.
It's complex compared to a SATA-II solution where one installs the drive, formats it, and then install OS...exactly the same as if they were using the original spinner.
I'm not against NVMe but it's my opinion, since the cMP won't natively boot NVMe, the benefits offered by NVMe are not justified for the majority of users. M.2 AHCI is a nice compromise but AHCI is (or has) fallen out of favor too.
Complexity isn't the issue with NVMe, but reliability COULD be an issue (the original question). It's not with the storage media itself. If you're using this 5,1 as a full-time machine and are not careful when updating OS/firmware it could be a headache. If you do not have an EFI card available, makes it much more difficult.
If reliability is the #1 and affordability the #2 need would suggest sticking with native OS support as much as possible, unless you know what you're getting into. Even more so if you're using this as an income producing machine.
If reliability is the #1 and affordability the #2 need would suggest sticking with native OS support as much as possible, unless you know what you're getting into. Even more so if you're using this as an income producing machine.
You can't upgrade the MP5,1 BootROM with updates or macOS installs. You have to shutdown and power on with Firmware Programming Mode.
Btw, outdated BootROMs is a the big problem with cMPs. People never know how to update it.
Last edited:
I agree with this 100%. IMO the NVMe solution is unlikely to benefit the OP and therefore a SATA-II solution is likely to be the appropriate one.
Now if the OP wants to tinker than the NVMe is a solution to consider. As long as the OP is aware that such a solution is unlikely to gain him much, if any, performance over the SATA-II solution.
Last edited:
I can only relate my own experience on a 2009 Mac Pro updated with a W3680, 24 GB memory, a Mushkin Reactor 1 TB SATA SSD, a Toshiba RD400 250GB PCIe (NVMe) SSD, and a couple of WD black spinners. The Mushkin is an average to slightly-above-average 2015 design and the Toshiba can hold its own in many bench results against the Samsung EVO's. Doing general "stuff" (compiling, development) off the Mushkin and the Toshiba felt pretty much the same. Longer, several-minute compiles were a few seconds faster running on the Toshiba. Long I/O intensive benchmarks and tests generally ran as much as 50% faster on the PCIe Toshiba but very rarely did I see anything better. Both SSD's spanked the WD hard drives, which were perceptibly slower even doing interactive stuff. (This was running linux, not OS/X, but I'd expect OS/X numbers to be very similar.)
I think the OP is over-thinking this. Get a Crucial MX500, which is fairly recent design with decent bench specs and good reliability; or, an ADATA, WD Blue, Kingston, even Samsung drive on sale; and be done with it would be my advice.
I think the OP is over-thinking this. Get a Crucial MX500, which is fairly recent design with decent bench specs and good reliability; or, an ADATA, WD Blue, Kingston, even Samsung drive on sale; and be done with it would be my advice.
According to this article, SSUAX (Gen 3) is PCIe 2.0 x2. But the 1TB is PCIe 2.0 x4. Does that mean the 1TB SSUAX would be just as fast as an SSUBX in a cMP?
If I remember correctly, it's slower than SSUBX in every benchmark. People with MP6,1 did extensive tests around the time Apple changed from SSUAX to SSUBX (late 2015/early 2016), write is a lot slower and the controller is not as efficient as the UBX one.
If I can choose, I'll will go for the SSUBX, but I'd go for a SSUAX too if the price is right.
Last edited: