Reading mode: Light Dark

fusion drive question for new mac

Go to last post
Nikko aus London said:
Nikko aus London wrote:

I've been researching all of this stuff as I'm about to place an order for a 27incher myself. What I'm planning to do is: (a) order the i7 processor & upgraded GPU; (b) order stock memory & replace myself with 32Gig Crucial from Amazon; (c) order stock 1Gig hard drive with no Fusion.

My strategy for storage is to leverage the amazing performance of Thunderbolt and external SSD in RAID 0 config for performance. Check out this thread: http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=1516014

and also check out these puppies: http://store.apple.com/us/product/H...rbolt-little-big-disk-hard-drive?fnode=5f&p=1

If you go this way, you relocate your boot drive to the SSD array and then use SSD for all your primary data storage. The internal 1 gig drive becomes just another disk attached to the system which can be used for more static content. For example, maybe use it for your TimeMachine? These SSD arrays can be daisy chained for easy expansion and, if you stripe, even more performance.

Good luck!

Nikko
Click to expand...



Wouldn't you want your Time Machine on an external not internal HD, in case your computer's drive crashes?
 
Nope, not if you embrace the idea of turning your external SSD array into your boot drive and home drive. Yes, you need to back it up to another physical storage device but why does it matter if that device sits within the iMac? If the SSD fails, restore from the internal drive. If the internal drive fails, you have your live data still intact on the SSD array, so then you can either: (a) get the internal drive replaced under warranty and then use it again for Time Machine; or (b) if out of warranty, just buy another external array and use it for Time Machine again.

Make sense?

Nikko
 
Last edited:
RudivanS said:
RudivanS wrote:
RudivanS said:
JulesJ wrote:
RudivanS said:
RudivanS wrote:
RudivanS said:
JulesJ wrote:
RudivanS said:
RudivanS wrote:

So, is there any general consensus on which internal HD alternative is best for a photographer? -
  • 3TB Serial ATA Drive @ 7200 rpm
OR
  • 1TB Fusion Drive?
Some say yes some say no :-(

Am ordering the 27" imac today. I use LR and PS mostley.

Probable specs: i7, NVIDIA GeForce GTX 680MX 2GB GDDR5 - will max the ram latter.

Thanks ..
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
JulesJ said:
JulesJ wrote:
JulesJ said:
RudivanS wrote:
JulesJ said:
JulesJ wrote:
JulesJ said:
RudivanS wrote:
JulesJ said:
JulesJ wrote:
JulesJ said:
RudivanS wrote:

So, is there any general consensus on which internal HD alternative is best for a photographer? -
  • 3TB Serial ATA Drive @ 7200 rpm
OR
  • 1TB Fusion Drive?
Some say yes some say no :-(

Am ordering the 27" imac today. I use LR and PS mostley.

Probable specs: i7, NVIDIA GeForce GTX 680MX 2GB GDDR5 - will max the ram latter.

Thanks ..
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
Hi Jules,

Here is a copy of my older post related to how the fusion drive works in detail by by arstechnica.com:

There are two pages:

"Achieving fusion—with a service training doc, Ars tears open Apple's Fusion Drive"

http://arstechnica.com/apple/2012/1...aining-doc-ars-tears-open-apples-fusion-drive

Find below copy of the last paragraph on the Page 2

“The actual impact of the tiering on user operations appears negligible—actuallyusingthe Mini as a regular computer feels nice and quick, as if it were a regular SSD-equipped Mac. In fact, for a casual user with less than about 110 GB of stuff, FD shouldn't ever actually touch the hard drive. In our tests, it didn't begin moving anything anywhere until the SSD was nearing capacity, so users without tons of stuff shouldn't ever even know it's there. In that case, the advantage of Fusion Drive over a pure SSD is that if they eventually outgrow the SSD, the system will automatically grow with them, keeping less often-used things on HDD.”

Leo
 
Hi Jules,

Replied to your Q and somehow it was not placed after your post.

I have ordered a 1TB Fusion Drive, however if not then it would be 1TB ATA and I7.

Leo
 
RudivanS said:
RudivanS wrote:

128GB of flash storage with either 1TB or 3TB fusion drive.

3TB option should have been 256GB of flash storage.
Click to expand...
Would you have been willing to pay the price they would have asked for 256 GB? Judging by the cost for the current Fusion Drive upgrade and by their prices for other SSD upgrades, a 256 GB Fusion Drive upgrade might have set you back $500 (for the SSD), plus $150 (for the larger HD), for a $650 upgrade price.
 
Leo said:
Leo wrote:

Hi Jules,

Replied to your Q and somehow it was not placed after your post.

I have ordered a 1TB Fusion Drive, however if not then it would be 1TB ATA and I7.

Leo
Click to expand...
Thanks for that Leo, anyway as stated I have ordered without the Fusion drive. I don't think I needed it.
 
Tom_N said:
Tom_N wrote:
Tom_N said:
RudivanS wrote:

128GB of flash storage with either 1TB or 3TB fusion drive.

3TB option should have been 256GB of flash storage.
Click to expand...
Would you have been willing to pay the price they would have asked for 256 GB? Judging by the cost for the current Fusion Drive upgrade and by their prices for other SSD upgrades, a 256 GB Fusion Drive upgrade might have set you back $500 (for the SSD), plus $150 (for the larger HD), for a $650 upgrade price.
Click to expand...
Just wanted to bargain hard. :-|


I see no reason to defend Apples pricing as they are making a very nice profit no doubt.

Generally, SSD pricing is falling as we speak ..
 
Yes. If you can afford it, the fusion drive is the best way to go because of its speed and its size bundles into one.
 
looking at this site, what I understand is that the Fusion Drive is not really any better than SSD. Would i be right?

http://www.macworld.com/article/2017365/lab-tests-pushing-a-fusion-drive-to-its-limits.html

Jules
Leo said:
Leo wrote:

Here is the link :

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/post/50561282

and the post copy (this thread has very helpful responces);

Achieving fusion—with a service training doc, Ars tears open Apple's Fusion Drive

http://arstechnica.com/apple/2012/1...ining-doc-ars-tears-open-apples-fusion-drive/

Find below the last paragraph of the Page 2

“The actual impact of the tiering on user operations appears negligible—actuallyusingthe Mini as a regular computer feels nice and quick, as if it were a regular SSD-equipped Mac. In fact, for a casual user with less than about 110 GB of stuff, FD shouldn't ever actually touch the hard drive. In our tests, it didn't begin moving anything anywhere until the SSD was nearing capacity, so users without tons of stuff shouldn't ever even know it's there. In that case, the advantage of Fusion Drive over a pure SSD is that if they eventually outgrow the SSD, the system will automatically grow with them, keeping less often-used things on HDD.”
Leo
Click to expand...
 
It wouldn't be faster than an SSD but what I like about it is that it gives you the speed along with a lot more storage capacity as the SSD is seamlessly blended with the 1TB traditional HD. In the few weeks I have been using it, it has lived up to all my expectations.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top