1TB Fusion vs. 512GB SSD performance?

robgendreau said:

I expect you could do this. Search on "diskutil coreStorage create" and you'll probably find instructions. I'm not sure if you have to use a specific brand/model of hard drive; in the past there were some issues with that in iMacs. I haven't seen anyone's write up of a replacement yet.

But I have to ask why? 128MB flash and 6TB HDD? Most folks doing anywhere near that kind of storage are gonna invest in external drives, especially since you've gotta back that up somehow. And again, RAID via Thunderbolt is plenty fast enough for lots of stuff. Look at the nMP to see how the heavy hitters manage this; it's not too different with the riMac.

Click to expand...

I have nMP that I use for the heavy workload, its connected to an older TB Display and a pair of TB LaCie RAID external enclosures. I am not too impressed with the external HD though, the speed is OK (Black Magic ~300MBPS), but the latency is slow. The nMP has a 1TB SSD, so it's very fast and has very low latency, but I must work the massive images I deal with off on the external drives and deal with the lower performance.

The reason I am considering the riMac is the display..it's beautiful. With the Fusion drive I am hoping the latency would be low because of the SSD, and like the idea of the most recent data being available on the SSD without my intervention. The riMAc would have access to the external HD as well thru TB. I will probably do most of the serious image processing on the nMP, and the final detailed processing on the riMac.

I will also use the riMac for more mundane things like web browsing, viewing documents and PowerPoint presentations.

At the Apple store the riMac was just easier on my eyes that the TB display in general, text was really clear to my old eyes and images were just amazingly clear.

Anyway, just thinking out loud in a what if situation.

Cheers,

Mike

Sounds to me like you should try to justify the 512GB SSD option. I know it's a slippery slope when you start adding a few hundred bucks here and a few hundred there but if moving from 256GB to 512GB SSD means you don't have to worry about external storage for a while then it'll be worth it.

FYI, I'm going to order a RiMac tomorrow and have been flip-flopping between 3TB Fusion and 512GB SSD for a few weeks. Right now I think 512GB SSD is the best option for me and I already have a 3TB Thunderbolt drive (Lacie D2) although I'm going to have to buy a long TB cable so I can hide the drive away out of sight and sound. I hate the fact that my "All in One" won't be an all in one any more but the 128GB SSD in the Fusion drive just isn't big enough IMHO. I would happily pay a bit extra to have a 256 or 512GB + 3TB HDD Fusion drive so that there is a greater chance of having most of what I need on the SSD. 128GB just isn't enough for me.

128gb in a fusion is pretty good - only when you open new apps do you feel the lag of a spinning disk. As the iMac has a hard drive bay and ssd blade slot I'm pretty sure you can upgrade the blade to a larger one to go with the 3tb. 256 and 512 blades are available on eBay.

Nobody has ever asked me to do one as every user seems to be happy with the performance of the stock fusion setup.

Though with thunderbolt 2 you could always use an promise Pegasus 2 m4 stocked with 4ssd raided. They are very quiet too.

Or on a budget buy a LaCie thunderbolt rugged external 1tb refurb from their store refit a fast ssd inside like an 840/850 and fusion that. I used sticky Velcro pads and stick it on the back of the iMac. It doesn't move and doesn't get seen despite being bright orange!

iBighouse said:

...128GB just isn't enough for me....Thunderbolt seems impressive as a name, will it run programs noticeably faster than installing them locally on a HDD?...Right now on my Windows system I have a 500GB Samsung SSD and have all my data and programs installed on it.

Click to expand...

I have the 3TB FD and it works remarkably well for professional video editing. My 2013 i7 iMac boots in about 25 sec. Whatever algorithm Apple uses highly leverages the SSD portion. I'm currently using about 1TB out of the 3TB and it is very fast.

Most of my data is on an 8TB Pegasus R4 RAID5 drive array, but I've experimented with putting everything on the FD, which works pretty well.

That said, FD will slow down as it fills up. In general SSD will not. If you can possibly afford it a 512GB SSD iMac would be the best choice. This is especially so since Windows performance is important for you.

Either way don't worry too much. Whether FD or SSD an iMac is a great machine and you will love it. Just take the time to learn how to do things the "Mac way". In a way it's very similar to Windows -- arguably OS X is more Windows-like than Windows 8 is. The difference you'll discover between Finder and Windows Explorer often relate to heritage and tradition. When you discover Finder doing something in a different way, there's a logical reason for that. Take time to explore and accept that.

Here's a great thing about OS X -- in the rare case it crashes and won't boot, you can just re-install OS X, and all your apps and icons will be exactly where you left them. There is no registry like Windows.

Gav Mack said:

buy a LaCie thunderbolt rugged external 1tb refurb from their store refit a fast ssd inside like an 840/850 and fusion that.

Click to expand...

Funny, that's more or less exactly what I had in mind – without the confusing "fusion that" bit, however. What did you do to your LaCie rugged: you added a SSD and formatted the SSD/HD as a home-made fusion drive?

workerbee said:

Funny, that's more or less exactly what I had in mind – without the confusing "fusion that" bit, however. What did you do to your LaCie rugged: you added a SSD and formatted the SSD/HD as a home-made fusion drive?

Click to expand...

I never did it to my system and being an experienced tech sometimes I make it sound too simple! Clients, mostly who bought HDD only models and didn't want the screen out or still under AppleCare. Bought the refurb 1Tb rugged drive off their store, removed the spinning disk, retrofitted the SSD and created the fusion setup off a bootable OSX USB. Sticking it to the back of the iMac or on the stand hides it from view and stops the cable getting disconnected and works pretty well I've found.

Though in the OP's case running windows a lot I would be torn to either go the 256 SSD route for bootcamp performance off the SSD, or alternatively doing a windows install and using winclone to migrate that to a TB external SSD for booting off that. Sticky velcro pads could hold two of those Lacie rugged's stuck on the back of the stand cos they aren't that heavy to fall off! Buying the stock 3tb iMac, with one Lacie rugged setup for fusion and the other for bootcamp would give excellent performance for everything.

No matter what apple's hype tries to tell you, fusion drives are a temporary transition to when SSD's are on all computers. They're faster across the board (way faster in some instances) and current drives like the Samsung 850 evo (now at $399 on Amazon for 1Tb!!) have 10x multiples more reliabilty.
Soon we'll look back at these computers with fusion drives and think 'yea, that was kind of lame' lol

robeddie said:

No matter what apple's hype tries to tell you, fusion drives are a temporary transition to when SSD's are on all computers. They're faster across the board (way faster in some instances) and current drives like the Samsung 850 evo (now at $399 on Amazon for 1Tb!!) have 10x multiples more reliabilty.
Soon we'll look back at these computers with fusion drives and think 'yea, that was kind of lame' lol

Click to expand...

The problem is we live in today not the future. For customers that have finite budgets, Fusion Drive delivers much of SSD real-world performance at a far larger size.

I have seen no credible data to show a specific SSD like the Samsung 850 (BTW which I have in my Windows PC) has 10x better reliability than quality HDDs.

When you get the 512GB or better SSD, it is guaranteed to be a Samsung SSD. At least when I bought mine this was true. A 256GB SSD could be toshiba OR Samsung. Toshiba is a crappier SSD.

And for the sake of all that is holy, stay away from Fusion drive. The whole damn point is to get the spinners OUTSIDE of the computer where they will not create additional noise and heat, at least not inside the very delicate and highly engineered inside of the iMac.

Cape Dave said:

...for the sake of all that is holy, stay away from Fusion drive. The whole damn point is to get the spinners OUTSIDE of the computer where they will not create additional noise and heat....

Click to expand...

I've heard people say things like this, and it has mystified me since I don't notice all the heat and noise from my 2013 iMac 27 with 3TB Fusion Drive. Therefore I decided to do a test:

My Windows PC is very quiet and uses Noctua fans, but I shut it down still could not hear the Fusion Drive in the iMac. I then shut down my Windows laptop and MacBook Air -- still couldn't hear it. I then shut down my 8TB Pegasus R4 -- still couldn't hear the iMac. I then shut down my 8TB G-Raid -- thought maybe I could faintly hear the iMac but not sure. I then shut down my house HVAC system and I could faintly hear the iMac, but I'm not sure whether I was hearing the Fusion Drive or the fan.

So if I shut down all other drives and computers (which means I can't do any work) and sit here and freeze with no HVAC, I can barely hear it -- and even then I'm not sure whether the faint noise is the Fusion Drive or iMac fan.

Re all the additional heat from Fusion Drive, iStat Menus shows my iMac's CPUs are about 37C and the Fusion Drive is 38C. I don't see that as a big problem.

Cape Dave said:

When you get the 512GB or better SSD, it is guaranteed to be a Samsung SSD. At least when I bought mine this was true. A 256GB SSD could be toshiba OR Samsung. Toshiba is a crappier SSD.

Click to expand...

128GB are either Toshiba (TS0128F, the worst), SanDisk (SD0128F, better but still pathetic) and SM0128F (best but still not that fast, because of the number of NAND cells in 128GB SSDs).

256GB are either Toshiba (TS0256F and still the worst), SanDisk (SD0256F, somewhere there but nowhere close to Samsung) and Samsung (SM0256F and performs almost identically to the SM0512F)

512GB and 1TB are Samsung only (SM0512F and SM1024F).

yjchua95 said:

128GB are either Toshiba (TS0128F, the worst), SanDisk (SD0128F, better but still pathetic) and SM0128F (best but still not that fast, because of the number of NAND cells in 128GB SSDs).

256GB are either Toshiba (TS0256F and still the worst), SanDisk (SD0256F, somewhere there but nowhere close to Samsung) and Samsung (SM0256F and performs almost identically to the SM0512F)

512GB and 1TB are Samsung only (SM0512F and SM1024F).

Click to expand...

I was lucky enough to get a Samsung SM0256F in my 13" rMBP, and the performance is on par with the SM0512F in my iMac.

One of the reasons I recommend against Fusion drive is because of the slow 128 GB SSD used for the SSD portion.

redheeler said:

I was lucky enough to get a Samsung SM0256F in my 13" rMBP, and the performance is on par with the SM0512F in my iMac.

One of the reasons I recommend against Fusion drive is because of the slow 128 GB SSD used for the SSD portion.

Click to expand...

+1.

I also lucked out and got an SM0256F in my 21.5" iMac (3.1GHz i7/16/256/750M).

It's almost on par with my SM0512F in my 13" rMBP.

The SM1024F in my 15" rMBP is another league altogether, but that's because of 4-lane PCIe.

Why is everyone certain that Samsung are the best and everything else sucks?

From what I can see, it's the sequential read and write that Samsung is best at.

If everyone is judging the Toshiba on the 2012 failures, we might as well judge Samsung on their 840 Evo aged data read speeds. Apparently their firmware update hasn't completely fixed the problem either.

I read some benchmarking of the MacBook Air SSDs and the Toshiba was actually quickest at some tasks and slower at others!

I don't think it's as clear cut as people make out.

qcmacmini said:

Why is everyone certain that Samsung are the best and everything else sucks?

From what I can see, it's the sequential read and write that Samsung is best at.

If everyone is judging the Toshiba on the 2012 failures, we might as well judge Samsung on their 840 Evo aged data read speeds. Apparently their firmware update hasn't completely fixed the problem either.

I read some benchmarking of the MacBook Air SSDs and the Toshiba was actually quickest at some tasks and slower at others!

I don't think it's as clear cut as people make out.

Click to expand...

The 840 Evo cannot be used as a comparison because it uses TLC NAND, which is of inferior NAND compared to MLC.

Apple only uses MLC NAND Samsung SSDs. The PCIe Samsung SSDs that Apple uses are based on the XP941, which are all MLC.

You have to take into account of the type of NAND cells used in the SSDs. TLC cannot be compared with MLC.

yjchua95 said:

The 840 Evo cannot be used as a comparison because it uses TLC NAND, which is of inferior NAND compared to MLC.

Apple only uses MLC NAND Samsung SSDs. The PCIe Samsung SSDs that Apple uses are based on the XP941, which are all MLC.

You have to take into account of the type of NAND cells used in the SSDs. TLC cannot be compared with MLC.

Click to expand...

Actually Apple used the Samsung 830 for many years and it is rumoured to suffer from the same problem (to a lesser degree), despite being MLC.

Apple also use(d) TLC in high capacity iPhone 6 models.

The point I'm making is that Samsung may make the best SSDs in the world (I own an 850 Pro 1TB for this reason) but it doesn't mean it's best in all scenarios or cases.

Some posts say Sandisk is worst and Toshiba is the middle performer, others says Toshiba is the worst.

I just feel 90% of the comments on this forum are based on sequential read and write and nothing else.

qcmacmini said:

I just feel 90% of the comments on this forum are based on sequential read and write and nothing else.

Click to expand...

Exactly. The only way anyone even knows is because they look it up and use Blackmagic... there's no way actually using your laptop for day to day activity can you tell the difference.

I totally get on principal that if you pay the same price, you should get the same performance (I'll admit that I would feel a little cheated), but practically speaking, it doesn't really make a difference in day-to-day system performance - you're generally talking about tenths of a second.

ixxx69 said:

Exactly. The only way anyone even knows is because they look it up and use Blackmagic... there's no way actually using your laptop for day to day activity can you tell the difference.



I totally get on principal that if you pay the same price, you should get the same performance (I'll admit that I would feel a little cheated), but practically speaking, it doesn't really make a difference in day-to-day system performance - you're generally talking about tenths of a second.

Click to expand...

My point was that I even found benchmarks showing the Toshiba was fastest at compression tasks compared to the Samsung and Sandisk.

I agree, people want to get the most performance possible for the money, but it gets a little silly when all you're basing it on is Blackmagic speed test results.

qcmacmini said:

My point was that I even found benchmarks showing the Toshiba was fastest at compression tasks compared to the Samsung and Sandisk.

I agree, people want to get the most performance possible for the money, but it gets a little silly when all you're basing it on is Blackmagic speed test results.

Click to expand...

Yeah, I got your point. I was agreeing with you.

iBighouse said:

Thank you. You just settled the issue. Guess I will have to go with an ONLY SSD option.

Click to expand...

Good choice. An internal SSD only and all your data on an external drive. Perfect.

Anyone with this dllemma would do well (imho) to consider the following:

1. Are you happy with your iMac being noisier than it needs to be?
2. Is it essential to have all your storage inside the iMac?
3. Will have no external devices physically connected to your iMac?
4. Are you happy using full disk encryption on your internal drives?

If you can answer YES to all of the above, then OK consider a Fusion drive. Otherwise, Fusion is not the best option for you.

1. Hard drives make noises and if sitting 2 ft away from your iMac in any quiet environment, you will hear it. If you want your iMac to be as quiet as possible, that means no Fusion.

2. What about your backups? Will you do them wirelessly and wirelessly only? If you have a USB or Thunderbolt external backup drive, you might as well put your data on an external drive as well. No need for Fusion.

3. The all-in-one design is appealing. For arty magazine shots in a New York loft apartment and a glass desk and a solitary iMac on it with nothing attached - not even a power cord ;-) Well that looks lovely doesn't it. Is that the real world? No. In the real world you have a UPS (you should do), printers, backup disk, subwoofer, speakers, DVD drive, scanner, USB hub etc. All sorts of things attached to your "all in one" device. Will an external data disk make any difference? No. And you can put it under the desk and away from earshot, so it's quieter than a Fusion drive. Again, no point in Fusion.

4. This is a biggy. What happens when your 6 month old iMac dies completely? Dead as a dodo, nothing happening at all when you press the power button? Are you happy for you iMac to go off to apple with all your scanned bank statements inside it? This is a showstopper for me. Anything leaving my house with my personal data must be encrypted. If you have a Fusion drive and you store personal stuff on it, are you happy to run Filevault on the drive? Are you also happy to have a strong password with upper and lower case and special characters that you change often and must key in several times a day? If not, you should not imho store anything personally sensitive inside an iMac. No Fusion.

joema2 said:

I've heard people say things like this, and it has mystified me since I don't notice all the heat and noise from my 2013 iMac 27 with 3TB Fusion Drive. Therefore I decided to do a test:

My Windows PC is very quiet and uses Noctua fans, but I shut it down still could not hear the Fusion Drive in the iMac. I then shut down my Windows laptop and MacBook Air -- still couldn't hear it. I then shut down my 8TB Pegasus R4 -- still couldn't hear the iMac. I then shut down my 8TB G-Raid -- thought maybe I could faintly hear the iMac but not sure. I then shut down my house HVAC system and I could faintly hear the iMac, but I'm not sure whether I was hearing the Fusion Drive or the fan.

So if I shut down all other drives and computers (which means I can't do any work) and sit here and freeze with no HVAC, I can barely hear it -- and even then I'm not sure whether the faint noise is the Fusion Drive or iMac fan.

Re all the additional heat from Fusion Drive, iStat Menus shows my iMac's CPUs are about 37C and the Fusion Drive is 38C. I don't see that as a big problem.

Click to expand...

Amen! I agree with that. The heat issue with FD is a total myth!

And I need at least 2TB of space and I don't have any money to buy a fast external storage (TB prices are just crazy...), so I'm very happy with the inner 3TB of my FD. When SSD will be affordable with big capacities, I will switch to 100% SSD And not for the silence nor the heat.

As someone with a good understanding of electronics and thermal/packaging design - but little specific knowledge about SSDs - , I've found the recent info on this thread about the various available SSD vendors quite interesting and informative. I have a SSD in my present iMac and will certainly spec one for the next, but need to be more educated about the specifics of the choices Apple is making. While we have the engagement of some folks here who seem to be knowledgeable about the performance of Samsung vs. other manufacturers, I'd like to ask them the following:

I get all the performance measurements - thanks. But any SSD will be more than fast enough for my usage. I would like to see info comparing Samsung vs. others in these areas:

How much power dissipation?

How do their failure rates compare?

In the end, I think all iMac users want a machine that is as quiet as possible and never needs to be opened up for repair.

Thanks.

colodane said:

As someone with a good understanding of electronics and thermal/packaging design - but little specific knowledge about SSDs - , I've found the recent info on this thread about the various available SSD vendors quite interesting and informative. I have a SSD in my present iMac and will certainly spec one for the next, but need to be more educated about the specifics of the choices Apple is making. While we have the engagement of some folks here who seem to be knowledgeable about the performance of Samsung vs. other manufacturers, I'd like to ask them the following:

I get all the performance measurements - thanks. But any SSD will be more than fast enough for my usage. I would like to see info comparing Samsung vs. others in these areas:

How much power dissipation?

How do their failure rates compare?

In the end, I think all iMac users want a machine that is as quiet as possible and never needs to be opened up for repair.

Thanks.

Click to expand...

Power dissipation is identical.

Failure rates depend on the controller and the NAND used.

robeddie said:

No matter what apple's hype tries to tell you, fusion drives are a temporary transition to when SSD's are on all computers. They're faster across the board (way faster in some instances) and current drives like the Samsung 850 evo (now at $399 on Amazon for 1Tb!!) have 10x multiples more reliabilty.
Soon we'll look back at these computers with fusion drives and think 'yea, that was kind of lame' lol

Click to expand...

The Fusion Drive is the only way to get a SATA socket inside your iMac ... if you want to be "future proof" you should think twice, once any update on the "pure-SSD" iMac would be much more risky/difficult/expensive.

We don't live in this future yet, so I hope in 2 years I would be able to update my Fusion's HDD for an 3TB(?) SSD myself ... for only a few hundred euros in about 20 minutes.