Register FAQ / Rules Forum Spy Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
Go Back   MacRumors Forums > Apple Hardware > Mac Peripherals

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old Dec 31, 2012, 12:55 PM   #1
Damian83
macrumors member
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
LaCie Rugged 256GB SSD or Seagate GoFlex+any SSD?

Hi, while im waiting for my new imac, i was going to use as main disk the seagate goflex thunderbolt enclosure + any SSD. howewer, from what ive heard around, inlcuding in this forum, the seagate enclosure even if 6G, limits speed to 375mb/s (thats effectively a 3G). now i noticed the lacie rugged 256gb ssd that's 380mb/s, all-in-one solution, and cheaper. the first solution costs me:
seagate goflex: 120€
elgato thunderbolt cable: 60€
240/256 gb SSD: around 160€

lacie disk (includes TB cable): 330€
what do u think about it? do u know other TB ssd's similar to this one?

the funny thing its that cheaper place where i found the lacie disk, is apple store
Damian83 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 31, 2012, 12:57 PM   #2
iancapable
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: London, United Kingdom
Quote:
Originally Posted by Damian83 View Post
Hi, while im waiting for my new imac, i was going to use as main disk the seagate goflex thunderbolt enclosure + any SSD. howewer, from what ive heard around, inlcuding in this forum, the seagate enclosure even if 6G, limits speed to 375mb/s (thats effectively a 3G). now i noticed the lacie rugged 256gb ssd that's 380mb/s, all-in-one solution, and cheaper. the first solution costs me:
seagate goflex: 120
elgato thunderbolt cable: 60
240/256 gb SSD: around 160

lacie disk (includes TB cable): 330
what do u think about it?

the funny thing its that cheaper place where i found the lacie disk, is apple store

Speed tests I have seen? LaCie looks best.
iancapable is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 31, 2012, 01:03 PM   #3
Damian83
Thread Starter
macrumors member
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Quote:
Originally Posted by iancapable View Post
Speed tests I have seen? LaCie looks best.
is it really 380mb/s?
Damian83 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 31, 2012, 02:03 PM   #4
iancapable
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: London, United Kingdom
Quote:
Originally Posted by Damian83 View Post
is it really 380mb/s?
Close to. Thunderbolt can certainly handle more than double that too
iancapable is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 31, 2012, 02:34 PM   #5
Damian83
Thread Starter
macrumors member
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Quote:
Originally Posted by iancapable View Post
Close to. Thunderbolt can certainly handle more than double that too
ok i get the lacie then. hoping better enclosures will be released in future
Damian83 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 31, 2012, 03:54 PM   #6
Jimmdean
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Speed on these is going to be a wash - no perceptual difference.

If 120GB is ok for you, I'd go for the Lacie - it's just too easy.

but if you are thinking more like 250GB, I'd look harder at the Seagate and save yourself about $100.00...


another note to think about regardless - the SSD in the Lacie is just good enough to take advantage of what the controller can offer - in the future (when better controllers are available) that SSD is not going to look so great. If you were to go with the Seagate you could future-proof yourself a little better by having your choice of SSD.
Jimmdean is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 31, 2012, 06:21 PM   #7
Damian83
Thread Starter
macrumors member
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jimmdean View Post
Speed on these is going to be a wash - no perceptual difference.

If 120GB is ok for you, I'd go for the Lacie - it's just too easy.

but if you are thinking more like 250GB, I'd look harder at the Seagate and save yourself about $100.00...


another note to think about regardless - the SSD in the Lacie is just good enough to take advantage of what the controller can offer - in the future (when better controllers are available) that SSD is not going to look so great. If you were to go with the Seagate you could future-proof yourself a little better by having your choice of SSD.
the prices i wrote are for 256gb on both solutions... if i have to look to the future than ill change all parts anyway (ssd, seagate, lacie)

----------

lets consider it in another way, the real way:
i already have the ssd, a 240gb sandisk extreme, that i paid 160. im planning to sell it for 120 (i never used it), then add 210 and buy the lacie
if i decide to dont sell it, then i have to add 190 (seagate 130 + elgato TB cable 60). what do u suggest to at this point?
Damian83 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jan 1, 2013, 12:56 AM   #8
iancapable
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: London, United Kingdom
Quote:
Originally Posted by Damian83 View Post
the prices i wrote are for 256gb on both solutions... if i have to look to the future than ill change all parts anyway (ssd, seagate, lacie)

----------

lets consider it in another way, the real way:
i already have the ssd, a 240gb sandisk extreme, that i paid 160€. im planning to sell it for 120€ (i never used it), then add 210€ and buy the lacie
if i decide to dont sell it, then i have to add 190€ (seagate 130€ + elgato TB cable 60€). what do u suggest to at this point?
If you already have a SSD, then just buy the seagate goflex thunderbolt. You can get one for 100

Last edited by iancapable; Jan 1, 2013 at 12:59 AM. Reason: wrote euros instead of pounds
iancapable is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jan 1, 2013, 11:30 AM   #9
Jimmdean
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
I have to agree - go with the Thunderbolt adapter and cable.

That is a better SSD than the one Lacie sells you and you already own it.
Jimmdean is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jan 1, 2013, 12:05 PM   #10
Damian83
Thread Starter
macrumors member
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jimmdean View Post
I have to agree - go with the Thunderbolt adapter and cable.

That is a better SSD than the one Lacie sells you and you already own it.
ok thanks! ill buy all, once i get that damn imac im waiting for from months!
Damian83 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jan 2, 2013, 01:42 PM   #11
Jimmdean
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Before you spend any more money at all, you might see if you have an option to test it via USB 3 - current single-drive Thunderbolt solutions are not much better than USB 3 in a lot of cases, and that would be a lot cheaper.
Jimmdean is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jan 2, 2013, 06:24 PM   #12
Damian83
Thread Starter
macrumors member
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jimmdean View Post
Before you spend any more money at all, you might see if you have an option to test it via USB 3 - current single-drive Thunderbolt solutions are not much better than USB 3 in a lot of cases, and that would be a lot cheaper.
i dont think so... too much benchmarks shows that ssd-tb are A LOT more faster than ssd-usb3
Damian83 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jan 3, 2013, 01:30 PM   #13
Jimmdean
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
I was thinking of reviews of the Lacie Rugged Thunderbolt SSDs where they compare the 2 interfaces to each other. From what I remember they weren't very far apart...
Jimmdean is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jan 3, 2013, 03:14 PM   #14
g4cube
macrumors 6502a
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
The Rugged implements UAS on the USB 3.0 port, which leads to the better performance. Not all USB 3.0 bridge/drive chassis/docks implement UAS.
g4cube is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jan 4, 2013, 10:42 AM   #15
kaktus
macrumors newbie
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
I also think that TB is today not really faster than USB 3 (Sata 3), maybe in the future when firmware getting better.

Here some benchmarks:
http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=1510842

http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=1483374

Please show me TB benchmark that are faster then the Thermaltake Silver River 5G USB 3 case.
I`m looking for the fastest connection before I buy a case. Now i tend to buy the Thermaltake Silver River 5G.
kaktus is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jan 4, 2013, 11:30 AM   #16
Damian83
Thread Starter
macrumors member
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Quote:
Originally Posted by kaktus View Post
I also think that TB is today not really faster than USB 3 (Sata 3), maybe in the future when firmware getting better.

Here some benchmarks:
http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=1510842

http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=1483374

Please show me TB benchmark that are faster then the Thermaltake Silver River 5G USB 3 case.
I`m looking for the fastest connection before I buy a case. Now i tend to buy the Thermaltake Silver River 5G.
ok ive changed mind for another time. ill get a good usb3 enclosure instead if the seagate. problem of seagate is that's is effectively a sata2 so even if connected to TB, its still worst a sata3 usb3.0. the rank is
sata2 usb3
sata2 tb
sata3 usb3
sata3 tb

considering there arent sata3 tb enclosures, i have to look for a usb3...
Damian83 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jan 4, 2013, 06:55 PM   #17
petsk
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Only a fool would put a SSD in a USB enclosure. Random read/write through USB interface is terrible compared to TB/SATA interface. The reason one would buy an SSD in the first place is for the amazing IOPS performance. If you're only interested in sequential performance, get two traditional HDDs and RAID them and you will get the same sequential performance as SSD, PLUS that you will have a ton of storage.

These stupid people who measures SSD performance with Blackmagic Disk Speed Test and what not are really starting to annoy me. It's the same retards who compares number of MP's in digital cameras and GHz's in CPU's.
petsk is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jan 5, 2013, 12:48 PM   #18
g4cube
macrumors 6502a
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Quote:
Originally Posted by petsk View Post
Only a fool would put a SSD in a USB enclosure. Random read/write through USB interface is terrible compared to TB/SATA interface. The reason one would buy an SSD in the first place is for the amazing IOPS performance. If you're only interested in sequential performance, get two traditional HDDs and RAID them and you will get the same sequential performance as SSD, PLUS that you will have a ton of storage.

These stupid people who measures SSD performance with Blackmagic Disk Speed Test and what not are really starting to annoy me. It's the same retards who compares number of MP's in digital cameras and GHz's in CPU's.
Petsk, there is no one benchmark that will provide a user with an indication of what is best, because the benchmark has no idea how a particular user will use his computer and external storage.

You bring up one good point that few will understand - IOPS - the number of IO operations per second that can be instigated. Contrast that with thru-put which is what benchmarks like Blackmagic and AJA measure.

Some operations perform many, many transactions, each with a small amount of data transferred in each operation; web browsing or data base lookups. Other operations like streaming, which start a transaction, and access contiguous data; like streaming video or streaming audio. For streaming (whether audio or video), this is not very taxing at all, unless one is streaming uncompressed 4K HD video.

Video editing does expect fast contiguous transfers af large amounts of data. In complex editing systems, multiple HD streams may be in use. The faster the thruput, the more streams can be handled; if working with uncompressed video, even more bandwidth is required.

What is nice about a benchmark program is that it is an indicator of performance when comparing one device or interface to another. So for comparative purposes, almost any benchmark is useful. IS one benchmark the end all or be all. Of course not.

For the average user perusing the voluminous info here? Plenty to digest and to keep one occupied. But I advise everyone to look beyond the benchmarks, and look to what the benchmarks are really measuring, and to look closely at how you are actually going to use your computer.
g4cube is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jan 9, 2013, 03:58 PM   #19
Damian83
Thread Starter
macrumors member
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
I finally got the elgato tb cable from amazon and ordered from apple store (again, cheaper place) the seagate enclosure. Tomorrow ill post benchmark results
Damian83 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jan 11, 2013, 08:34 AM   #20
Damian83
Thread Starter
macrumors member
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
250 write, 375 read
Damian83 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jan 11, 2013, 11:52 AM   #21
PatriotInvasion
macrumors 65816
 
PatriotInvasion's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Boston, MA
When I think of Seagate, I think of grumbling drives and iMac recalls. Go with LaCie.
__________________
27-inch iMac [Late 2013, 3.2GHz quad-core Intel Core i5, 8GB of memory, 256GB of flash storage], iPad Air [16GB, silver], iPhone 5s [16GB, silver], Time Capsule [1TB, A1355, 3rd Generation]
PatriotInvasion is offline   0 Reply With Quote

Reply
MacRumors Forums > Apple Hardware > Mac Peripherals

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Similar Threads
thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
512GB SSD 840 PRO in Lacie rugged SSD R1PPER iMac 14 Jun 15, 2014 12:43 AM
Running Mountain Lion on lacie rugged 256gb SSD sam3020 iMac 9 Feb 10, 2013 12:11 PM
Seagate Thunderbolt Adapter + Samsung 840 Pro vs. Lacie 120 GB Rugged SSD loscamos iMac 11 Jan 24, 2013 08:04 PM
non-Seagate SSD and GoFlex Thunderbolt adapter kgallag1 MacBook Pro 4 Oct 4, 2012 11:18 AM

Forum Jump

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:24 AM.

Mac Rumors | Mac | iPhone | iPhone Game Reviews | iPhone Apps

Mobile Version | Fixed | Fluid | Fluid HD
Copyright 2002-2013, MacRumors.com, LLC