Seeking insight for cloning a laptop HDD to SSD

[BonzaiDuck]

Here's the scenario: I just acquired a Gateway E-475M [C2D/Centrino] laptop, which has been refurbished with a 500GB WD HDD. At my request, I had Win 7-64 SP-1 installed. Lest anyone feel like snickering -- yes, this model had been released in 2007, but it has a great reputation, a new battery, new HDD, etc. etc.

I want to replace the HDD with a Crucial MX100 512GB SSD. While it won't likely work at SATA-III speed, it should really reduce the battery draw, and should be much faster than the WD drive.

The E-475M has no eSATA port, but plenty of USB 2 ports. I have various options as to how I proceed:

1) Pull the laptop's HDD from it, hook it up to my main desktop system together with the new Crucial MX100, and boot to my Acronis Disk Director 11 Update 2 CD -- then clone using my desktop system, install the Crucial to the laptop, etc. etc.

2) (variation of 1) I have an external SATA-to-USB/eSATA device: it has a slot with a door so you simply plug in the 3.5" or 2.5" drive, hook up the eSATA cable to a desktop system, and power it on:

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...-071-_-Product

Then boot and perform the cloning operation. But I would still need to install either the target SSD or the source HDD in my system temporarily. Then remove the two drives and install the SSD to the laptop.

3) I could hook up the external SATA HDD dock to the laptop via USB2. If possible, clone the laptop HDD that way. If Acronis DD or TI 2014 (I have both) can properly clone through a USB2 interface, then I have the least work to do. I only need to replace the HDD with the SSD in the laptop and call it a day.

But -- for option 3 -- CAN I DO THAT? Can I clone an SATA drive to another drive through a USB2 interface?

 

[postmortemIA]

yep 3) would work -I did it few times on my laptop.

 

[G73S]

you can clone but nothing beats a clean install for sheer performance

 

[WildW]

Can't see any reason why you couldn't clone via USB. Will just take a bit longer.

I've done a few successful clones with Macrium Reflect recently, and it's free - been very impressed with it. Managed to clone a 1TB Windows 7 partition (with only about 100 GB used) onto a 200GB SSD without any fuss. Rebooted with SSD and it just worked as if nothing happened. Windows didn't even complain about any activation nonsense.

 

[BonzaiDuck]

you can clone but nothing beats a clean install for sheer performance

I think there's a "mythical" aspect to that platitude. it boils down to the health of the Windows installation on the source drive.

Elsewhere in this same forum, I'd mentioned hardware and driver-related problems I'd had on my desktop system, which I began troubleshooting in January. I cleaned up the hardware and driver sources of problems; then mounted an effort to research and eliminate sources of all event-log red-bangs and yellow-bangs. We might have known for 15 years that there are "benign" errors and warnings, so a list of such events is an intermediate product of the clean-up effort.

Once that's done, and once one identifies any mis-installed software that contributes to the reds and yellows, one can then defrag the boot-system disk. But it wouldn't matter so much anyway: defragging doesn't do anything to improve performance on an SSD.

On this particular laptop, the OS was installed a mere two months ago (at most), and there is little software to complicate things.

I suppose I had this fear that an external USB interface for an SATA drive would somehow defeat cloning, but apparently from responses here so far -- it doesn't. That leaves me with one remaining concern.

The laptop has an ICH8M Intel controller, and came off the production line around 2007. Device Manager shows the appropriate AHCI driver installed. But I cannot tell if the controller works as "SATA-II" or as "SATA-150."

The point and reason of using an SSD like the Crucial MX100: it should reduce power-draw considerably and extend battery-operation beyond the 5-hour spec limit. While I'd had decent luck running SSDs under SATA-II controllers that weren't "AHCI compliant" (NVidia nForce chipsets), I'm only thinking now of the uncertainties with this project.

But I can certainly save the WD 500GB drive currently configured to the laptop as a backup. I would hope for SSD performance approaching 300MB/s in sequential read benches. So if the SSD is hamstrung for an SATA-150 capability, it would give me second thoughts of sacrificing the MX100 to improving the duration of battery operation or matching the capacity of the WD laptop disk currently configured.

 

[Engineer]

3) I could hook up the external SATA HDD dock to the laptop via USB2. If possible, clone the laptop HDD that way. If Acronis DD or TI 2014 (I have both) can properly clone through a USB2 interface, then I have the least work to do. I only need to replace the HDD with the SSD in the laptop and call it a day.

But -- for option 3 -- CAN I DO THAT? Can I clone an SATA drive to another drive through a USB2 interface?

I use Macrium Reflect and have done what you are describing about 5 times. Works flawlessly every time. Slow but flawlessly.

 

[BonzaiDuck]

I use Macrium Reflect and have done what you are describing about 5 times. Works flawlessly every time. Slow but flawlessly.

It shouldn't matter: if Macrium "does it right," then Acronis DD11-update-2 and TI 2014 Premium will "do it right."

And now, I have better confirmation that this old laptop hardware will support what you'd want from an SATA-III SSD hooked up to an SATA-II controller. But only time and some benchies will tell the full story. . . . Here's the spec-sheet posted at Softpedia for a driver:

http://drivers.softpedia.com/get/MO...M-Intel-SATA-AHCI-Driver-7001020-for-XP.shtml

The nice news is under the heading "-Hard drives"

[Ya know, you might wonder of general OEM manufacturers in the industry might have misgivings that the SSD revolution will give new life to old laptops, like used cars get more attention in a cost-conscious economy when people don't want to pay for the latest sexus-Lexus. Of course, I could probably get a newer laptop (with an HDD, even so) for a little more than I paid for this E-475M and the upgrades. I think I'm going to be happy, though . . . Just wish it was "wireless-N" instead of "wireless-G".]

 

[Engineer]

It shouldn't matter: if Macrium "does it right," then Acronis DD11-update-2 and TI 2014 Premium will "do it right."

Sorry, wasn't trying to infer that Acronis wouldn't do it right. Was only trying to say that I've done the backup from SATA to USB many times with no issue, that's all.

 

[corkyg]

Your option 3 will work perfectly. I have done it many times. The only difference between SATA II and eSATA is speed. TI 2014, which you have, will do it perfectly.

Glad you cited the myth of a clean install. 🙂 (Especially on laptops!)

 

[BonzaiDuck]

Your option 3 will work perfectly. I have done it many times. The only difference between SATA II and eSATA is speed. TI 2014, which you have, will do it perfectly.

Glad you cited the myth of a clean install. 🙂 (Especially on laptops!)

Well, it's interesting -- I'd run the Defrag "Analysis" on the hard disk on June 5 -- that was just yesterday. The result was "0% defragmentation." No software was added between yesterday and today -- nothing of any merit or anything unusual that would entail making more writes and deletions from the laptop HDD.

So I went ahead and cloned the HDD today with the BlacX device. Someone said it would "take a long time," but it went really fast. But when I did the defrag analysis on the SSD, it reports "2% defragmentation."

On the power-consumption issue, the varying "estimated" fuel-level on the battery bounced between 4.5 hours and 7.5 hours, but it's hard to get a handle on exactly how much battery charge is extended with the SSD, since it still all depends on the usage patterns.

On the performance end, the increase in sequential read rate with the Crucial MX100 is less than stellar even for an SATA-II controller, but it seems to have effectively doubled the laptop HDD's performance. That is, sequential reads with AS SSD are about 260+ MB/s.

Whether I said it already, this is the first "real" laptop I've ever owned. It's got a new battery and the battery is highly rated. But it still leaves me with a sense of unease. I avoided the technology because I knew batteries deteriorate, they cost money, and I didn't think the longevity of the charge in hours was very good for a lot of laptops.

All in all, though, "mission accomplished." For an OLD laptop with a Centrino C2D T8300, it's definitely now "fast enough." I may even buy a $10 USB dongle to give it wireless-N speed. For basic business use or "writing the great American novel," it's pretty darn snappy.

I think I can find the proprietary docking station or "port replicator" for it at EBAy -- the ones I saw there weren't priced at more than $25 or $30.

 

[bonehead123]

Been there, done this, too many times to count....no worries mate, especially with a relatively clean windows installation to start with.....and the acronis sw 🙂

I have sucessfully revitalized many 2005-2010-era lappys this way for younger family members and they think I just waved a magic wand or something......

 

[spdfreak]

So, will this work well for an old Vostro 1000 Athlon 64 X2? The current hard drive is the original 80GB with a relatively fresh install of Win7. I'm thinking of getting one of the 50.00 120GB SSD's that are popping up. I wouldn't guess that the brand matters since the laptop is so old and slow. I don't see an option for AHCI in the bios so I don't know how that will affect it.

 

[WT]

I have had no luck cloning a 320gb HDD to an 80GB Intel SSD using both Acronis TI and Macrium Reflect. I only want to copy the bootable partition, not the recovery partition, and I have PLENTY of space available, so that even the 80GB is only half full after imaging.

I just can't the damn thing to boot into Windows !! It sits there with a blinking cursor after the splash screen, and I have verified that the SSD is set to bootable and changed the boot order, and even removed the 320GB HDD in case that was causing a conflict. I used a Tt BlackX Duet to copy the drive, and tried multiple times so far.

The SSD and HDD both test fine, and the data is physically copied onto the SSD, but I wish OP luck on this one. I assume I am doing something wonky to mess things up.

 

[BonzaiDuck]

So, will this work well for an old Vostro 1000 Athlon 64 X2? The current hard drive is the original 80GB with a relatively fresh install of Win7. I'm thinking of getting one of the 50.00 120GB SSD's that are popping up. I wouldn't guess that the brand matters since the laptop is so old and slow. I don't see an option for AHCI in the bios so I don't know how that will affect it.

Limited though it is, I've had some recent experience with this.

You'd think "proof of the pudding" would be robust, if you succeed in getting an SATA-III SSD to work on 8-year-old NVidia nForce controller technology. At that point in the NVidia mobo history, they were releasing the 680i boards, and NV didn' give a good g**d*** if their controller was AHCI-compliant, even as Intel's contemporary controllers met the standard.

My Mushkin and Patriot SSDs worked fine with the NForce "SATA/IDE" mode. However, the problem arises: without AHCI compliance, you may not be able to update the firmware on that particular machine. BUT!! . . .

My laptop has nothing in BIOS identifying "AHCI" either. So -- do this:

Check your Device Manager to identify the controller-manufacture, and see how the driver is represented. The BIOS on the old machines -- or laptops with sparse BIOS options -- doesn't need to show "AHCI" anywhere, but the driver and device-manager info will show "AHCI 1.0" if the controller and driver are "compliant." For instance, my lappie uses the Intel ICH8M controller, and the device shows up under the "IDE/ATA/ATAPI" node of device manager as "AHCI 1.0" controller.

 

[BonzaiDuck]

I have had no luck cloning a 320gb HDD to an 80GB Intel SSD using both Acronis TI and Macrium Reflect. I only want to copy the bootable partition, not the recovery partition, and I have PLENTY of space available, so that even the 80GB is only half full after imaging.

I just can't the damn thing to boot into Windows !! It sits there with a blinking cursor after the splash screen, and I have verified that the SSD is set to bootable and changed the boot order, and even removed the 320GB HDD in case that was causing a conflict. I used a Tt BlackX Duet to copy the drive, and tried multiple times so far.

The SSD and HDD both test fine, and the data is physically copied onto the SSD, but I wish OP luck on this one. I assume I am doing something wonky to mess things up.

You shouldn't have this problem with Acronis, but there is at least one problem you might have.

When you clone a drive, the Acronis SW (either DD11 or TI) will ask you at some point whether you want to duplicate the drive signature. That's fine, and if you mark that checkbox, it should automatically fill another checkbox for "shut down machine" upon completion of the clone.

With the same drive signature, two such drives connected to the system when it reboots will cause boot failure, and removing the appropriate disk (clone source) will still leave the system in the unbootable state. However, it can be fixed by booting from the Windows Install disc and (carefully!) choosing the "Repair" option. Other types of errors need a recovery disc, but this problem doesn't require it.

 

[spdfreak]

Limited though it is, I've had some recent experience with this.

You'd think "proof of the pudding" would be robust, if you succeed in getting an SATA-III SSD to work on 8-year-old NVidia nForce controller technology. At that point in the NVidia mobo history, they were releasing the 680i boards, and NV didn' give a good g**d*** if their controller was AHCI-compliant, even as Intel's contemporary controllers met the standard.

My Mushkin and Patriot SSDs worked fine with the NForce "SATA/IDE" mode. However, the problem arises: without AHCI compliance, you may not be able to update the firmware on that particular machine. BUT!! . . .

My laptop has nothing in BIOS identifying "AHCI" either. So -- do this:

Check your Device Manager to identify the controller-manufacture, and see how the driver is represented. The BIOS on the old machines -- or laptops with sparse BIOS options -- doesn't need to show "AHCI" anywhere, but the driver and device-manager info will show "AHCI 1.0" if the controller and driver are "compliant." For instance, my lappie uses the Intel ICH8M controller, and the device shows up under the "IDE/ATA/ATAPI" node of device manager as "AHCI 1.0" controller.

The chipset is identified as an ATI RS480/Radeon Express 200. The disk controller is listed as SB600/700/800 ATA controller, Interface ATA. Shows up in DM as ATA channel 0 &1. So, I guess not. People on the Dell forum have upgraded to SSD's but I wonder if it is worth it with the slow controller.

 

[BonzaiDuck]

The chipset is identified as an ATI RS480/Radeon Express 200. The disk controller is listed as SB600/700/800 ATA controller, Interface ATA. Shows up in DM as ATA channel 0 &1. So, I guess not. People on the Dell forum have upgraded to SSD's but I wonder if it is worth it with the slow controller.

Is there anything in DM on that "IDE/ATA/ATAPI" node that says "AHCI 1.0 controller?" Point is -- even if it isn't "AHCI compliant," the SSD should still work fine at nearly the performance with AHCI-compliancy.

You would probably expect to see a doubling of sequential Read/Write performance with such an SATA-III SSD using an SATA-II controller. In my laptop, for which I started this thread, sequential read bench on the Crucial MX100 was between 250 and 300MB/s.

The power consumption between a 2.5" laptop HDD and an SSD doesn't differ nearly as much as it would between an SSD and a desktop 3.5" drive -- if at all, but the SSD would consume less power. Here, I have at least a doubling of performance. While the HDD's speed was not a nuisance and it seemed like a smooth-working laptop, the SSD makes a noticeable improvement.

At the same time, I might have asked "Is it worth the price of the Crucial to get that?" If I'd done a better job of "rational calculation" before setting course for the disk swap, I might have said "No." But now, there's no reason to put things back the way they were. It's a better laptop for the SSD.

[A "LIGHTBULB" ADDENDUM] You're rocking an Athlon-based laptop. Obviously, the drive controller is not likely to be "Intel." Apparently Intel was at the vanguard of "AHCI compliancy." I still maintain, though, that it shouldn't deter you from at least considering an SSD swap-in. But you might want to weigh it with some things I've said here, anyway.

 

[spdfreak]

Well, they keep getting cheaper so at some point I will do the experiment... NE has the 128GB Sandisk UltraPlus for 60.00 today. If it isn't fast enough to matter, I'll just put the old drive back in and use the SSD for something else.

 

[BonzaiDuck]

Well, they keep getting cheaper so at some point I will do the experiment... NE has the 128GB Sandisk UltraPlus for 60.00 today. If it isn't fast enough to matter, I'll just put the old drive back in and use the SSD for something else.

I should have done some benchmark tests as soon as I had the laptop working and before installing the SSD. But I just checked a chart at Tom's HW for a comparison of maximum read rates on laptop drives.

There are actually a couple models (Toshiba makes one of them) which show 200 MB/s.

But the original drive in my Gateway lappie was replaced with a WD Scorpio Blue, and the same benchie for the WD disks is between 112 and 120.

CrystalDiskMark shows the Crucial performing at more than double those speeds for the same test.

It still shows that I "haven't kept up" adequately. I couldn't have imagined any HDD getting 200 MB/s.