USB 2.0 vs. Firewire 800 speeds

miamirulz29 · Dec 26, 2012, 11:52 PM

In my macbook pro, I have a 128GB SSD. My music and photos are too large to fit on the SSD. I currently have an external hard drive that is almost always connected to my mac that holds my music, pictures, and movies folder (I set up symbolic links). This hard drive is connected via Firewire 800. I am looking to get a more portable hard drive. The hard drives I am looking at are connected via USB 3.0/2.0. My mac doesn't have USB 3.0, so it would use USB 2.0. Would I notice a difference in speed when accessing the data from my hard drive using the USB 2.0 hard drive instead of a firewire 800 hard drive? Also, I think that more portable hard drive is 5400 RPM, whereas my firewire hard drive is 7200 RPM. Would this also affect speeds when accessing data? I am not too worried about backing up or transferring data because I usually transfer small files, i'm just worried about the speeds when accessing data.

Intell · Dec 27, 2012, 12:19 AM

FireWire 800 will transfer files a little over twice as fast as USB 2. It'll also have a lower latency and it uses less computational resources.

miamirulz29 · Dec 27, 2012, 12:46 AM

I'm not worried about transfer speeds. If my music and photos are on the hard drive, would iTunes or iPhoto run slower because it has to access the data from the hard drive?

justperry · Dec 27, 2012, 01:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by miamirulz29

I'm not worried about transfer speeds. If my music and photos are on the hard drive, would iTunes or iPhoto run slower because it has to access the data from the hard drive?

Does your MBP have firewire, if so there are 2,5" Firewire drives or external cases on the market.
If you only use iTunes with it it won't get slower, even movies can be played back with stuttering, USB 2 should do the job, but again there are FW 2,5 drives.

miamirulz29 · Dec 27, 2012, 12:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by justperry

Does your MBP have firewire, if so there are 2,5" Firewire drives or external cases on the market.
If you only use iTunes with it it won't get slower, even movies can be played back with stuttering, USB 2 should do the job, but again there are FW 2,5 drives.

I know there are firewire drives, but as I said in the OP, I am looking for a more portable drive. Those drives don't have FW, only USB. But if you say it shouldn't be any slower, then I may buy the drive. I just wanted to know if others had experience with this.

yusukeaoki · Dec 27, 2012, 01:48 PM

FW are known to be less CPU consumption since they have their own "CPU".
On the other hand, USB has to share its thinking with the main CPU so
it will cause your computer to be more loaded.

pbmagnet4 · Dec 27, 2012, 02:13 PM

You should get something like this. Abit expensive but in the long run, but you will have a usb3 compatible drive for when you get your next computer to get higher speeds.

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/cont...=REG&A=details

justperry · Dec 27, 2012, 09:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by miamirulz29

I know there are firewire drives, but as I said in the OP, I am looking for a more portable drive. Those drives don't have FW, only USB. But if you say it shouldn't be any slower, then I may buy the drive. I just wanted to know if others had experience with this.

Yes there are portable FW drives as I claimed in my original post.
See Screenshot, a 2.5" drive.
This is a fairly old external casing, it is still PATA but there are also SATA enclosures with FW and USB.

Startech.com 2.5 inch USB FireWire SATA External Hard Drive Enclosure

robvas · Dec 27, 2012, 09:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by miamirulz29

I know there are firewire drives, but as I said in the OP, I am looking for a more portable drive. Those drives don't have FW, only USB. But if you say it shouldn't be any slower, then I may buy the drive. I just wanted to know if others had experience with this.

WD MyPassport Studio has FW and USB. It's also a 2.5" drive

el-John-o · Dec 27, 2012, 10:46 PM

To answer your question OP, yes, using USB 2.0 over FW800 will be slower. The applications will run at the same speed, but it will take them longer to sort through files and manipulate them (iPhoto especially). If your choices are USB 2.0 or FW800, use FW800.

USB 3.0 is faster than FW800, but since that's not an option, FW800 is likely the fastest option you have on your machine.

A third and even faster option for you, would be an Optibay. This replaces your optical drive with another hard drive. You can use any 2.5" Hard Drive, like a 500GB HDD. It will be faster than anything external, and be always available. It will reduce your battery life some, but not a lot, perhaps not even noticeably. If you still use your optical drive, you can buy an external superdrive enclosure which will allow you to mount your superdrive into a USB 2.0 enclosure.

miamirulz29 · Dec 27, 2012, 10:57 PM

Thanks for all your help guys. I think I'm just going to stay with my current hard drive. It's portable enough and has FW 800.

Dec 26, 2012, 11:52 PM	#1
miamirulz29 macrumors member Join Date: Jun 2009	USB 2.0 vs. Firewire 800 speeds In my macbook pro, I have a 128GB SSD. My music and photos are too large to fit on the SSD. I currently have an external hard drive that is almost always connected to my mac that holds my music, pictures, and movies folder (I set up symbolic links). This hard drive is connected via Firewire 800. I am looking to get a more portable hard drive. The hard drives I am looking at are connected via USB 3.0/2.0. My mac doesn't have USB 3.0, so it would use USB 2.0. Would I notice a difference in speed when accessing the data from my hard drive using the USB 2.0 hard drive instead of a firewire 800 hard drive? Also, I think that more portable hard drive is 5400 RPM, whereas my firewire hard drive is 7200 RPM. Would this also affect speeds when accessing data? I am not too worried about backing up or transferring data because I usually transfer small files, i'm just worried about the speeds when accessing data. __________________ 15" Macbook Pro \| 2.2Ghz i7 \| 8GB RAM \| 128GB Apple SSD \| Hi-Res Antiglare
	0

Dec 27, 2012, 12:19 AM	#2
Intell macrumors G4 Join Date: Jan 2010 Location: Inside	FireWire 800 will transfer files a little over twice as fast as USB 2. It'll also have a lower latency and it uses less computational resources. __________________ Last edited by Intell; Yesterday at 11:50 AM.
	2

Dec 27, 2012, 12:46 AM	#3
miamirulz29 Thread Starter macrumors member Join Date: Jun 2009	I'm not worried about transfer speeds. If my music and photos are on the hard drive, would iTunes or iPhoto run slower because it has to access the data from the hard drive? __________________ 15" Macbook Pro \| 2.2Ghz i7 \| 8GB RAM \| 128GB Apple SSD \| Hi-Res Antiglare
	0

Dec 27, 2012, 01:48 PM	#6
yusukeaoki macrumors 68020 Join Date: Mar 2011 Location: California, USA.	FW are known to be less CPU consumption since they have their own "CPU". On the other hand, USB has to share its thinking with the main CPU so it will cause your computer to be more loaded. __________________ 17" MacBook Pro (Early 2011), 2.2GHz i7 Quad, 16GB RAM, 128GB SSD+1TB HDD@5400rpm 11" MacBook Air (Mid 2012), 2.0GHz i7 Dual, 8GB RAM, 256GB Flash iPhone 5 (White), 32GB
	0

Dec 27, 2012, 02:13 PM	#7
pbmagnet4 macrumors member Join Date: Jan 2009	You should get something like this. Abit expensive but in the long run, but you will have a usb3 compatible drive for when you get your next computer to get higher speeds. http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/cont...=REG&A=details __________________ 15" iMac G4, 1ghz PPC, 2gb RAM, 160gb HD 13" MBP, 2.5ghz i5, 8gb 1866mhz RAM, 240gb SSD iPhone, 16gb ; iPad 1, 64gb ; iPhone 4, 32gb iPod, 20gb ; iPod Nano, 16gb
	0

Dec 27, 2012, 10:46 PM	#10
el-John-o macrumors 6502a Join Date: Nov 2010 Location: Missouri	To answer your question OP, yes, using USB 2.0 over FW800 will be slower. The applications will run at the same speed, but it will take them longer to sort through files and manipulate them (iPhoto especially). If your choices are USB 2.0 or FW800, use FW800. USB 3.0 is faster than FW800, but since that's not an option, FW800 is likely the fastest option you have on your machine. A third and even faster option for you, would be an Optibay. This replaces your optical drive with another hard drive. You can use any 2.5" Hard Drive, like a 500GB HDD. It will be faster than anything external, and be always available. It will reduce your battery life some, but not a lot, perhaps not even noticeably. If you still use your optical drive, you can buy an external superdrive enclosure which will allow you to mount your superdrive into a USB 2.0 enclosure. __________________ Windows7 PC - Phenom II 965@4GHz x4 Cores, 4GB DDR3-2133, Radeon HD5870 \| iPhone 5 32GB \| iPad WiFi+3G 64GB \| Mid 2012 MacBook Pro 13", Dual 256GB SSD's in RAID 0, 16GB DDR3-1600
	0

Dec 27, 2012, 10:57 PM	#11
miamirulz29 Thread Starter macrumors member Join Date: Jun 2009	Thanks for all your help guys. I think I'm just going to stay with my current hard drive. It's portable enough and has FW 800. __________________ 15" Macbook Pro \| 2.2Ghz i7 \| 8GB RAM \| 128GB Apple SSD \| Hi-Res Antiglare
	0

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Email this Page	Search this Thread: Advanced Search
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode