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

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old Feb 28, 2013, 03:21 AM   #1
deckard666
macrumors newbie
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Bristol
Mac Pro 5,1 -Max hard drive storage?

Anyone know if there is a max capacity limit for a 5,1 Mac Pro as I am currently running with 4 x 2 TB but now 3 and 4 TB are dropping in price I might upgrade...I googled for it but couldnt seem to find any sort of definitive answer.
deckard666 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Feb 28, 2013, 04:37 AM   #2
emigrant
macrumors newbie
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: New York-Bklyn
http://www.maxupgrades.com/istore/in...&ParentCat=414 good 4u imho
__________________
Follow me: http://twitter.com/emigrant_/
emigrant is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Feb 28, 2013, 12:48 PM   #3
Tesselator
macrumors 601
 
Tesselator's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Japan
Quote:
Originally Posted by deckard666 View Post
Anyone know if there is a max capacity limit for a 5,1 Mac Pro as I am currently running with 4 x 2 TB but now 3 and 4 TB are dropping in price I might upgrade...I googled for it but couldnt seem to find any sort of definitive answer.
There's no limit. If an 80TB drive came out tomorrow you could just plug it in and go.

As far as what capacity to choose there are a few things to consider:
  1. Spindle speed.
  2. Number of platters.
  3. Platter density.
  4. Interface.
  5. Buffer size.
Assuming you're after performance you want fast spindle speeds, as few platters as possible, the highest density possible, the fastest interface possible, and the largest buffer. I guess everyone already knows all that but just in case some n00bs arrive here I thoughI would write it out.
  1. The fastest spindles commonly available in large (over 1TB) capacity units is like 7200RPM.
  2. Number of platters is a little less critical but shoot for 3 or less if you can.
  3. Platter density currently is up to 500GB per surface or 1TB per disk
  4. I guess the fastest commonly available interfaces right now are SATA III with a large buffer.
  5. Currently 64MB is pretty average however if you wait another year or maybe two then this will change over to 8 or 16GB of NAND memory - which will increase performance by an order of magnitude or so.

Currently using this kind of thinking, I came to the conclusion that the Seagate 3TB, 7200RPM, 3-platter, 64MB Cache, SATAIII drives for between $110 and $130 are the optimal models to select.

For large files over about five or six hundred kilobytes, I get between 170 to 210MB/s with a single drive, 420 to 500MB/s on a 2-drive RAID0, and about 100MB/s added to that for each drive I add to the RAID stripe.

This is considerably up from the 1TB and 2TB drives from two or three years back - not including specialty drives like the velociraptor and others. These times are just using the internal drive bays on the MacPro1,1 - SATA III drives on the SATA II connections.

In something like the BlackMagic encoded stream test I get like this (2-drive RAID0 followed by a 4-drive RAID0 both using the ST3000DM001 Seagate Barracudas I mentioned above):




I suppose if someone else is making a 3 platter 3TB SATA III 7200RPM drive those will preform similarly as well. When I did my research I didn't come across any others tho. These will last me until the SSHD drives with the large NAND caches arrive - I hope.

http://www.tomshardware.com/charts/h...3.16,2900.html

.

Last edited by Tesselator; Feb 28, 2013 at 02:26 PM.
Tesselator is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Feb 28, 2013, 12:51 PM   #4
InuNacho
macrumors 65816
 
InuNacho's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: In that one place
Quote:
Originally Posted by emigrant View Post
Are there any reviews for that thing?
InuNacho is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Feb 28, 2013, 01:03 PM   #5
emigrant
macrumors newbie
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: New York-Bklyn
Quote:
Originally Posted by InuNacho View Post
Are there any reviews for that thing?
Hmm, check: http://www.pauljoy.com/2012/08/mac-pro-raid-setup/ but external HDD.
__________________
Follow me: http://twitter.com/emigrant_/
emigrant is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Feb 28, 2013, 02:49 PM   #6
Tesselator
macrumors 601
 
Tesselator's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Japan
External like he has it there is a lot more intelligent IMO. The Optical bay wan't meant to house and cool 4 HDD units. Even though I have two stuffed up there myself.
Tesselator is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old May 15, 2013, 08:48 AM   #7
rzr219
macrumors newbie
 
Join Date: May 2013
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tesselator View Post
There's no limit. If an 80TB drive came out tomorrow you could just plug it in and go.

As far as what capacity to choose there are a few things to consider:
  1. Spindle speed.
  2. Number of platters.
  3. Platter density.
  4. Interface.
  5. Buffer size.
Assuming you're after performance you want fast spindle speeds, as few platters as possible, the highest density possible, the fastest interface possible, and the largest buffer. I guess everyone already knows all that but just in case some n00bs arrive here I thoughI would write it out.
  1. The fastest spindles commonly available in large (over 1TB) capacity units is like 7200RPM.
  2. Number of platters is a little less critical but shoot for 3 or less if you can.
  3. Platter density currently is up to 500GB per surface or 1TB per disk
  4. I guess the fastest commonly available interfaces right now are SATA III with a large buffer.
  5. Currently 64MB is pretty average however if you wait another year or maybe two then this will change over to 8 or 16GB of NAND memory - which will increase performance by an order of magnitude or so.

Currently using this kind of thinking, I came to the conclusion that the Seagate 3TB, 7200RPM, 3-platter, 64MB Cache, SATAIII drives for between $110 and $130 are the optimal models to select.

For large files over about five or six hundred kilobytes, I get between 170 to 210MB/s with a single drive, 420 to 500MB/s on a 2-drive RAID0, and about 100MB/s added to that for each drive I add to the RAID stripe.

This is considerably up from the 1TB and 2TB drives from two or three years back - not including specialty drives like the velociraptor and others. These times are just using the internal drive bays on the MacPro1,1 - SATA III drives on the SATA II connections.

In something like the BlackMagic encoded stream test I get like this (2-drive RAID0 followed by a 4-drive RAID0 both using the ST3000DM001 Seagate Barracudas I mentioned above):

Image
Image

I suppose if someone else is making a 3 platter 3TB SATA III 7200RPM drive those will preform similarly as well. When I did my research I didn't come across any others tho. These will last me until the SSHD drives with the large NAND caches arrive - I hope.

http://www.tomshardware.com/charts/h...3.16,2900.html

.
Ok, so question do you run 2 RAID 0 software or are you using a RAID controller card? I am looking at adding 4 new drives to my system 5.1 but I would like to run a RAID 5 because of speed and redundancy. However the Internal Disk Utility does not offer this only 0 or 1. So what would be the best way to go?
rzr219 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old May 15, 2013, 02:32 PM   #8
Tesselator
macrumors 601
 
Tesselator's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Japan
Quote:
Originally Posted by rzr219 View Post
Ok, so question do you run 2 RAID 0 software or are you using a RAID controller card? I am looking at adding 4 new drives to my system 5.1 but I would like to run a RAID 5 because of speed and redundancy. However the Internal Disk Utility does not offer this only 0 or 1. So what would be the best way to go?
I use RAID0 with TimeMachine backups (and bi-monthly image duplicates). When I'm working the image backups are more like weekly tho. I'm using the native Software (firmware) RAID myself but that doesn't mean you should. It's all about whatever fits your system usage. If you've determined that RAID5 is wanted or needed then go for that. As for controllers I believe there are several good ones to choose from and probably a few not so good ones too. One of the features I would look for is a large hi-speed cache onboard. I guess there are MANY sites with words of wisdom and concrete benchmarks to look at when choosing a controller. Sounds like fun! Maybe start a thread here to critique your findings as you go along - might be useful.

I'd also like to advise that you or anyone doing these kinds of upgrades test as you go. For example you might order the drives first and test them in Native RAID0 with different Raid Block Sizes prior to installing the RAID Controller card. Then you will have a reference to compare with. Try different stuff before you commit and begin using the drives. How different are 2-drive sets, 3, 4 etc. from one another? And so on. For this kinda thing we are usually our own best teachers.

Last edited by Tesselator; May 15, 2013 at 02:46 PM.
Tesselator is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old May 15, 2013, 04:19 PM   #9
rzr219
macrumors newbie
 
Join Date: May 2013
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tesselator View Post
I use RAID0 with TimeMachine backups (and bi-monthly image duplicates). When I'm working the image backups are more like weekly tho. I'm using the native Software (firmware) RAID myself but that doesn't mean you should. It's all about whatever fits your system usage. If you've determined that RAID5 is wanted or needed then go for that. As for controllers I believe there are several good ones to choose from and probably a few not so good ones too. One of the features I would look for is a large hi-speed cache onboard. I guess there are MANY sites with words of wisdom and concrete benchmarks to look at when choosing a controller. Sounds like fun! Maybe start a thread here to critique your findings as you go along - might be useful.

I'd also like to advise that you or anyone doing these kinds of upgrades test as you go. For example you might order the drives first and test them in Native RAID0 with different Raid Block Sizes prior to installing the RAID Controller card. Then you will have a reference to compare with. Try different stuff before you commit and begin using the drives. How different are 2-drive sets, 3, 4 etc. from one another? And so on. For this kinda thing we are usually our own best teachers.
Thanks,
I am looking to improve my drive speed. I didn't reliaze how slow it was even after installing a SSD drive. I just ran my test and my raid 1 is at 137. So for The video work I do this is frustrating, so I am looking to improve this speed and at the same time have some type of backup like raid 0, but I guess I need to test a build of 0 & 1 to really see the difference with the onboard software raid controller that comes with the mac. I looked at your specs and were blown away by them. I know Mac Connect makes a RAID controller, but I need to know what is the best bet for what I will get.
rzr219 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old May 15, 2013, 04:38 PM   #10
Dr. Stealth
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: SoCal
Tesselator

Tesselator, You're a wealth of information....

Thanks.
__________________
Mac Pro 5,1 12 Core @ 3.33GHz - 64GB RAM - Dual 500 GB SSD - Dual EVGA FTW+ GTX 680 4GB
7 TB 7200 HDs - Aux 450 watt PSU - 27" Cinema Display - SpacePilot Pro - GeekBench 30,883
Dr. Stealth is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old May 15, 2013, 10:54 PM   #11
Tesselator
macrumors 601
 
Tesselator's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Japan
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr. Stealth View Post
Tesselator, You're a wealth of information....

Thanks.
Thanks, but I have point out the irony being that if one were to boil down the crux of my message there it's kind of: go look yourself. Hehehe...



Quote:
Originally Posted by rzr219 View Post
Thanks,
I am looking to improve my drive speed. I didn't reliaze how slow it was even after installing a SSD drive. I just ran my test and my raid 1 is at 137. So for The video work I do this is frustrating, so I am looking to improve this speed and at the same time have some type of backup like raid 0, but I guess I need to test a build of 0 & 1 to really see the difference with the onboard software raid controller that comes with the mac. I looked at your specs and were blown away by them. I know Mac Connect makes a RAID controller, but I need to know what is the best bet for what I will get.
RAID1 does have a little bit of speedup but it's almost not measurable. RAID0 increases significantly proportional to the number of member drives attached - give sufficient bandwidth exists on the buss (or busses combined) they're attached to. From my experience the increase isn't linear tho. It kinda goes:
Single Drive: 1X
2-Drv RAID0: 1.9X
3-Drv RAID0: 2.5X
4-Drv RAID0: 3.2X
and then like a fixed amount for every drive added after that. With the new Seagate Barracuda drives for example, that's about 100MB/s. Most engineering schools of thought and practice recommend against having more than 7 drives in any kind of stripped array - six is the most I've tried on a MacPro.

RAID5 has a speed-up curve very similar to RAID0 but a do-nothing drive is added for every two drives in the stripe set. So for example when you create a 3-drive RAID5 it looks and behaves just like there were only two of the same drives but in a RAID0 array. Err, at least that's one way to look at it.

With TimeMachine or other auto-backup system employed RAID1 and RAID5 are not further useful and for the typical SOHO boutique offer no practical safety advantages at all.
Tesselator is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old May 16, 2013, 05:12 AM   #12
TheEasterBunny
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Delaware
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tesselator View Post
Thanks, but I have point out the irony being that if one were to boil down the crux of my message there it's kind of: go look yourself. Hehehe...





RAID1 does have a little bit of speedup but it's almost not measurable. RAID0 increases significantly proportional to the number of member drives attached - give sufficient bandwidth exists on the buss (or busses combined) they're attached to. From my experience the increase isn't linear tho. It kinda goes:
Single Drive: 1X
2-Drv RAID0: 1.9X
3-Drv RAID0: 2.5X
4-Drv RAID0: 3.2X
and then like a fixed amount for every drive added after that. With the new Seagate Barracuda drives for example, that's about 100MB/s. Most engineering schools of thought and practice recommend against having more than 7 drives in any kind of stripped array - six is the most I've tried on a MacPro.

RAID5 has a speed-up curve very similar to RAID0 but a do-nothing drive is added for every two drives in the stripe set. So for example when you create a 3-drive RAID5 it looks and behaves just like there were only two of the same drives but in a RAID0 array. Err, at least that's one way to look at it.

With TimeMachine or other auto-backup system employed RAID1 and RAID5 are not further useful and for the typical SOHO boutique offer no practical safety advantages at all.
Those speed bumps in RAID0 have been my experience too, I thought it odd that it was like 1.8/1.9. Mathematically speaking it would seem 2.0 for two drives 3.0 for three and so on, but not the case.
I am totally in agreement with the "check it out for yourself" idea. Things just make more sense when I do.
TheEasterBunny is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old May 16, 2013, 06:37 AM   #13
TheEasterBunny
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Delaware
Just to give you an idea of what size drives CAN be recognized under DU on Lion, in a Pro 1,1
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	2.3EB Drive.png
Views:	29
Size:	25.5 KB
ID:	412455   Click image for larger version

Name:	16 Petabyte partitions.png
Views:	54
Size:	102.3 KB
ID:	412456  
TheEasterBunny is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old May 16, 2013, 03:04 PM   #14
rzr219
macrumors newbie
 
Join Date: May 2013
Well Im going to jump on in and get 4 new drives and run at RAID 0. I currently have 1 Super Drive and 1 BD Drive, so 4 is max I can do. I also should upgrade my OS as Snow Leopard is showing signs of non compatibly for some of my new plugins for Video editing. So if I put in 4 new 3 TB drives whats the math for total space?

Also having a hard time finding the exact specs on these hard drives, and recommends?

Here is one that looks ok based on the mana web site.

Last edited by rzr219; May 16, 2013 at 03:26 PM. Reason: more to add
rzr219 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old May 16, 2013, 03:45 PM   #15
TheEasterBunny
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Delaware
Quote:
Originally Posted by rzr219 View Post
Well Im going to jump on in and get 4 new drives and run at RAID 0. I currently have 1 Super Drive and 1 BD Drive, so 4 is max I can do. I also should upgrade my OS as Snow Leopard is showing signs of non compatibly for some of my new plugins for Video editing. So if I put in 4 new 3 TB drives whats the math for total space?

Also having a hard time finding the exact specs on these hard drives, and recommends?

Here is one that looks ok based on the mana web site.
In RAID0 that would be 12TB, each of those come in at a 150MB/s transfer rate so you would get Approx. 375MB/s transfer in RAID0.
Tesselator will correct me if I'm wrong, please?
There are eSATA port duplicators, and a variety of other devices that would allow more than 4 drives in your Pro.

Seagate Barracuda 3TB drive Toms hardware test bench

Last edited by TheEasterBunny; May 16, 2013 at 04:54 PM.
TheEasterBunny is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old May 16, 2013, 03:59 PM   #16
Tesselator
macrumors 601
 
Tesselator's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Japan
Quote:
Originally Posted by rzr219 View Post
Also having a hard time finding the exact specs on these hard drives, and recommends?

Here is one that looks ok based on the mana web site.
To find the exact specs visit the manufacturer website.

The drives you linked to are the ones I'm using as well. I found a whole pile of them at a department store for like $100 ea. so I just bought the whole pile. For large sequential file transfers (which is what you're mostly trying to maximize with RAID0) these drives profile right up top! Very close to manufacturer estimates they can sustain just a tad over 200MB/s to/from the fist 50% to 60% of the platter surface (so, like, the first 2TB). They also have 1TB and 2TB models that are of the same design (1TB platter, SATA3, 7200RPM, Not Green Profiled) and slightly faster too. With each additional platter the I/O gets a little slower so the 1TB is a tad faster than the 3TB. There's a 4TB drive of the same design as well but I guess 4 is the number that breaks the camel's back because they profile noticeably lower (still fast but slower than the 3, 2, 1TB models).

Last edited by Tesselator; May 16, 2013 at 04:13 PM.
Tesselator is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old May 16, 2013, 04:29 PM   #17
rzr219
macrumors newbie
 
Join Date: May 2013
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tesselator View Post
To find the exact specs visit the manufacturer website.

The drives you linked to are the ones I'm using as well. I found a whole pile of them at a department store for like $100 ea. so I just bought the whole pile. For large sequential file transfers (which is what you're mostly trying to maximize with RAID0) these drives profile right up top! Very close to manufacturer estimates they can sustain just a tad over 200MB/s to/from the fist 50% to 60% of the platter surface (so, like, the first 2TB). They also have 1TB and 2TB models that are of the same design (1TB platter, SATA3, 7200RPM, Not Green Profiled) and slightly faster too. With each additional platter the I/O gets a little slower so the 1TB is a tad faster than the 3TB. There's a 4TB drive of the same design as well but I guess 4 is the number that breaks the camel's back because they profile noticeably lower (still fast but slower than the 3, 2, 1TB models).
Thanks for the quick reply. The drives just happen to be one sale so $100 each till end on tonight. I went to Seagates website and did notice that the 4TB drives are slower, at around 180 max and 5.10 Latency, the 3TB are 210 at 4.16. So for the price this will work quite well, plus It will give me more space. So I will install the new drives then install my OS, then upgrade to Lion (Newest version) then use my time machine to restore my data files. If all goes as planned should be smooth (as long as I dont get any bad drives). I will let you know how it went.
rzr219 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old May 24, 2013, 10:52 PM   #18
rzr219
macrumors newbie
 
Join Date: May 2013
New Drives added and software upgrade

So I added the 4 new drives. I then configured for 4 drives in Raid 1 (mirror). I got 142 Read & 200 Write. I then changed to 2 Raid 1 drives with 165 read & 150 write. Then I reloaded software and rebuilt the drives to a Raid 10 config 2 Raid 1, then both into a Raid 0. Now I have 220 Read & 290 Write. If I was using a hardware Raid controller I could get more, but I am very happy. I know have 6 TB of storage this will last me well beyond the needs of this Mac. Now comes the software reloading, I am going to let time machine restore files tonight.
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	DiskSpeedTest.png
Views:	16
Size:	367.1 KB
ID:	413680  
rzr219 is offline   0 Reply With Quote

Reply
MacRumors Forums > Apple Hardware > Desktops > Mac Pro

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Similar Threads
thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Using Mac Mini and hard drive enclosure to make bootable drive for Mac Pro sssssshhhhhh OS X 10.8 Mountain Lion 12 May 27, 2014 11:55 AM
Dropbox and MacBook Pro Hard Drive Storage Question abertram Mac Applications and Mac App Store 12 Apr 4, 2014 07:18 PM
USB 3 or Thunderbolt hard drive enclosure as Mac Pro internal storage replacement. peabo Mac Pro 16 Nov 29, 2013 10:08 AM
MacBook Pro External Hard Drive as Network Attached Storage nfg05 OS X 10 Nov 18, 2012 03:05 PM

Forum Jump

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:35 PM.

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

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