Go Back   MacRumors Forums > Apple Hardware > Desktops > iMac

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old Dec 9, 2012, 11:53 PM   #51
12dylan34
macrumors 6502a
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
For what it's worth, I put a 7200 RPM drive in my 2008 MBP up from a 5400 to no noticeable difference.
12dylan34 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 10, 2012, 03:36 AM   #52
MacFoodPoisoner
Banned
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
[QUOTE=Apple Corps;16457465]
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacFoodPoisoner View Post
I m sorry, and I mean no offense, but this reads like such a huge pile of horse manure to me..."

I am not sorry for these comments, and it may or may not offend you, but most of your posts read "like such a huge pile of horse manure to me"

In your short tenure within this community you are on a bashing orgy - can't understand why you waste your time here with all the vitriolic rhetoric - steady stream of complaints.

Do you even own a 2012 iMac with a 5400 rpm hdd? I do, along with other iMacs, 17" MBP, Mac Pro, iPads, iPhone 5s, Apple TV. I have a lot of Apple equipment and many years with it. No, I'm not a fan boy blinded to Apple products - but it is an excellent ecosystem from my experience. What Apple gear do you own?

I no longer care for Microsoft or Mercedes - I don't spend time on those forums.
Two imacs, two macbooks, a powerbook, a mini, two ipads. I think your liking apple biases you towards my posts. I don't mind you thinking my posts are horse manure btw, it's a free country. . I was making some points though with arguments you are doing an ad hominem instead.

Last edited by MacFoodPoisoner; Dec 10, 2012 at 03:25 PM.
MacFoodPoisoner is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 10, 2012, 03:51 AM   #53
NATO
macrumors 68000
 
NATO's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Northern Ireland
My wife's 4-5yr old iMac felt like it was on its last legs (it was unbearably slow to me), however when I took out the 5400RPM Hard Drive and replaced it with a SSD it has given the computer a whole new lease of life, it's incredible just how much of a difference replacing that ONE component has made.

I just don't think a 5400RPM hard drive cuts it in this day and age as a primary boot drive. It's just Apple trying to get you to buy a more expensive model because the cost to Apple of supplying at least a 7200RPM drive is minimal, it's a marketing decision to get people to buy the next model up.
__________________
Genius is perseverance in disguise
NATO is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 10, 2012, 07:40 AM   #54
lawhochun
macrumors member
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Hong Kong
Quote:
Originally Posted by toddzrx View Post
If so, then why are you buying an iMac? Not criticizing; just don't understand the point of paying for an iMac when it sounds like a Mini might do.
I am an 21.5 inch base model owner. My reason for buying an imac has always been the design factor and because this machine has the best large display you can find in the market at an affordable price point (at least for now). Performance has never been an read important factor for me, and this machine has been very adaquate so far.

However i think in a few months i will buy a LaCie rugged 120GB thunderbolt SSD drive and use it as the boot drive.
__________________
21.5" iMac late 2012; iPhone 6 64GB Gold; iPad Air 16GB Wifi Space Grey 16GB; iPod Touch 5G; iPod Classic 5.5G; Apple TV 3rd gen; Airport Express 2012
lawhochun is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 10, 2012, 08:29 AM   #55
erikbailey
Thread Starter
macrumors newbie
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Quote:
Originally Posted by rnb2 View Post
Whatever you were seeing there, it looks like they fixed it - you can do 16GB as 2x8GB, or 8GB as 2x4GB, but there are only two RAM slots. I think I was mis-remembering the stock RAM in the mini (it's 4GB, not 8GB as I was thinking), so if you just want 8GB, you're fine, but you'll have to pull the existing 4GB and replace it with whatever you want.
Indeed - agree with that. And I realized I had a typo in my post with the Crucial URL - I meant 4GBx2 - got my 4 and 2 mixed up...
erikbailey is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 10, 2012, 09:48 AM   #56
azentropy
macrumors 65816
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Surprise
It really comes down to what you are used to.

I don't have experience with the 5400rpm drive in the new iMac, however I do with the new Mac mini. When I first got the 2.3ghz i7 Mac mini I was really put off by how slow it "felt". The SSD I had ordered hadn't arrived yet. It booted slow, launched apps slow, iTunes was slow, iPhoto was slow, Mail was slow (several large accounts), booting or restarting my VMWare instances slow. I did a side by side comparison with my 2010 13" MBP (which has a 128gb SSD) and the mini was much slower than in those tasks that I pretty much do every day (except booting). I then installed the SSD and the thing flies.

Also in black magic bench marks, the 1tb 5400rpm drive in the Mac mini is about 30-50% slower than the 1tb 7200rpm drive in my 2011 i7 21.5" iMac.
azentropy is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 10, 2012, 09:50 AM   #57
erikbailey
Thread Starter
macrumors newbie
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Quote:
Originally Posted by azentropy View Post
It booted slow, launched apps slow, iTunes was slow, iPhoto was slow, Mail was slow (several large accounts), booting or restarting my VMWare instances slow. [...] I then installed the SSD and the thing flies.
Thanks - that's exactly what I'm looking for. iTunes is a huge reason for this new machine, and it's sluggish enough on its own that I don't want anything slowing it down further.

At this point, I'm completely sold on the SSD. Odds are 90+% I'll do it via a mini, since the total cost is several hundred less than an equivalent iMac.
erikbailey is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 10, 2012, 10:16 AM   #58
sectime
Banned
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacFoodPoisoner View Post
thanks for the link, I 'll have a look at it. Your opinion of them however is really divergent from the common view of them.
More opinions don't always mean they are correct. Toms hardware website has good info on this also.
sectime is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 10, 2012, 12:10 PM   #59
sno1man
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Quote:
Originally Posted by erikbailey View Post
Thanks - that's exactly what I'm looking for. iTunes is a huge reason for this new machine, and it's sluggish enough on its own that I don't want anything slowing it down further.

At this point, I'm completely sold on the SSD. Odds are 90+% I'll do it via a mini, since the total cost is several hundred less than an equivalent iMac.
one other data point for you. I had responded earlier. I have the base 21.5 . Specific to iTunes, my library is just over 23000 songs and 125 movies. Itunes launches in about 4 seconds (two bounces in the dock). I have no idea how my library compares to yours, but 4 seconds seemed reasonable to me.

I also have not noticed any lag in scrolling through my collection, even when listing by songs which seems to be the slowest mode for iTunes.

Hope that is helpful
sno1man is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 10, 2012, 01:02 PM   #60
Lankyman
macrumors 6502a
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: U.K.
I think it can be very much horses for courses. I work for a national organisation with thousands of employees, no SSD for us, we are on a virtual network with the servers based over a hundred miles away. Personally, my iMac uses sleep and is ready for use in seconds and my Windows 8 Lappy has a total cold boot time of 9 seconds so who needs SSD?
Lankyman is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 10, 2012, 01:41 PM   #61
erikbailey
Thread Starter
macrumors newbie
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Quote:
Originally Posted by sno1man View Post
one other data point for you. I had responded earlier. I have the base 21.5 . Specific to iTunes, my library is just over 23000 songs and 125 movies. Itunes launches in about 4 seconds (two bounces in the dock). I have no idea how my library compares to yours, but 4 seconds seemed reasonable to me.

I also have not noticed any lag in scrolling through my collection, even when listing by songs which seems to be the slowest mode for iTunes.

Hope that is helpful
Very helpful, actually. Appreciate it! --Erik
erikbailey is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 10, 2012, 03:24 PM   #62
MacFoodPoisoner
Banned
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Quote:
Originally Posted by sno1man View Post
I'm sorry that you are such an obvious arrogant ###. Love those "i am superior to thou pronouncements" Go back to your fantasizing while running blackmagic 37 times in a row.
Wow...take it easy buddy.

If you want your opinion to go unchallenged you might not want to post in forums. You claimed that you and your boss were the superior experts and the rest were nitwits of the...

Quote:
"elite haxxor" contingent that obsess over 1.5% differences in benchmarks and scream that things are "heartbreakingly slow" when in reality we are often talking about fractions of a second.
...so save me the "superior than thou" lecture.

What you said is simply untrue for ssds which boost daily performance and productivity veeery noticeably. No one is talking here about overclocked cpu or ram. And they can come within a hybrid drive, or can be as small as 32gbs for os and apps, the rest can go in the hd drive for storage. So users can get the best of both worlds, for a minimal cost, and they don't have to buy a 1tb ssd.

And what the hell is blackmagic?
MacFoodPoisoner is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 10, 2012, 03:47 PM   #63
iCaleb
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: USA
What would be faster as a boot drive for the 2012 iMac / Mac mini???

The stock hdd that's already inside VS an external ssd hooked up via usb 3.0?
iCaleb is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 10, 2012, 04:26 PM   #64
monokakata
macrumors 65816
 
monokakata's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Hilo, Hawai'i
Quote:
Originally Posted by roxxette View Post
Sadly i cant go any deep because of language barrier but i will leave these link so you take a look, concept its the same:

http://www.zdnet.com/blog/ou/how-hig...ip-you-off/322
A couple of things jump out at me.

First, the article is 6 years old.

Second, the article compares 15K vs 10K and then 7.2K, and is juggling capacity as well as speed, and talking about price/performance. It's all interesting enough, but has nothing to do with whether a 5400 is effectively slower than a 7200.

I've had 15K drives and 10K drives (SCSI, in my AlphaServer) and they were low capacity but they did what they needed to. In their day, they were dynamite. Now, a joke -- the 15K drive is 18 gb.

There's really no comparison there -- what's needed is a reasonable comparison between 5400 and 7200 drives of the same or at least similar capacity.
monokakata is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 10, 2012, 04:34 PM   #65
sno1man
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacFoodPoisoner View Post
Wow...take it easy buddy.

If you want your opinion to go unchallenged you might not want to post in forums. You claimed that you and your boss were the superior experts and the rest were nitwits of the...



...so save me the "superior than thou" lecture.


And what the hell is blackmagic?
Wow, you just can't help yourself can you?

And just to be clear, what I posted was not anger but unfiltered contempt specifically for you......
sno1man is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 10, 2012, 04:51 PM   #66
MacFoodPoisoner
Banned
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Quote:
Originally Posted by sno1man View Post
Wow, you just can't help yourself can you?

And just to be clear, what I posted was not anger but unfiltered contempt specifically for you......
Whatever snowman, Merry Christmas and take her easy with your unfiltered contempt for "elite haxxors" and other forum members. And get an sdd too snowman or a hybrid and enjoy your machine flying, and you can thank me later.
MacFoodPoisoner is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 10, 2012, 06:45 PM   #67
roxxette
Banned
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Quote:
Originally Posted by monokakata View Post
A couple of things jump out at me.

First, the article is 6 years old.

Second, the article compares 15K vs 10K and then 7.2K, and is juggling capacity as well as speed, and talking about price/performance. It's all interesting enough, but has nothing to do with whether a 5400 is effectively slower than a 7200.

I've had 15K drives and 10K drives (SCSI, in my AlphaServer) and they were low capacity but they did what they needed to. In their day, they were dynamite. Now, a joke -- the 15K drive is 18 gb.

There's really no comparison there -- what's needed is a reasonable comparison between 5400 and 7200 drives of the same or at least similar capacity.
Yes but isnt the same concept ?
roxxette is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 10, 2012, 07:41 PM   #68
toddzrx
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Quote:
Originally Posted by erikbailey View Post
At this point, I'm completely sold on the SSD. Odds are 90+% I'll do it via a mini, since the total cost is several hundred less than an equivalent iMac.
One other option for you: buy a used 2011 iMac that can you can install an SSD into. Despite the rumors, it's not hard; I just did it on a mid-2010. You'll get several years of solid use out of it.
toddzrx is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 10, 2012, 08:07 PM   #69
rpramanik
macrumors member
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: San Francisco, USA
think twice

Quote:
Originally Posted by erikbailey View Post
Thanks - as with all of the replies, that's very helpful. Maybe I should do a mini after all (which I can easily upgrade to an SSD)... Decisions, decisions! :-)
2 friends that got Mini's earlier in the year (2012) because they didn't want to wait for the a new iMac regret it... mostly due to the graphics card.

external drives over thunderbolt can be just as fast as internal mini... so don't fret.
__________________
Mac in all forms: phone, desktop, tablet, tv
rpramanik is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 11, 2012, 02:33 AM   #70
Mr-Stabby
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
I've just ordered 28 of the base model for my department at work. I'm not so much bothered about them not being SSD, what i'm more bothered about is whether it is actually slower than the 7200rpm drive in the 2011 base model that it replaced. Mostly for starting up and opening applications, as everything else for us will be network based anyway, even user folders. I'm hoping to do a video of boot times comparisons between the 2011 and 2012 base models when we get them, as everyone who has done these comparisons has focused on the Fusion Drive.
Mr-Stabby is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 11, 2012, 09:25 AM   #71
zhenya
macrumors 68020
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr-Stabby View Post
I've just ordered 28 of the base model for my department at work. I'm not so much bothered about them not being SSD, what i'm more bothered about is whether it is actually slower than the 7200rpm drive in the 2011 base model that it replaced. Mostly for starting up and opening applications, as everything else for us will be network based anyway, even user folders. I'm hoping to do a video of boot times comparisons between the 2011 and 2012 base models when we get them, as everyone who has done these comparisons has focused on the Fusion Drive.
I would be interested to hear as well because a 2.5" laptop drive should be considerably slower than a 3.5" desktop drive.
zhenya is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 11, 2012, 09:33 AM   #72
johnnyturbouk
macrumors 65816
 
johnnyturbouk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Manchester, UK
99% Confidence Intervals of me hating going back to a spinning drive, let alone a 5400rpm at that: 10!
__________________
An fanboi since in-utero
johnnyturbouk is online now   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 12, 2012, 05:05 PM   #73
Lankyman
macrumors 6502a
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: U.K.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr-Stabby View Post
I've just ordered 28 of the base model for my department at work. I'm not so much bothered about them not being SSD, what i'm more bothered about is whether it is actually slower than the 7200rpm drive in the 2011 base model that it replaced. Mostly for starting up and opening applications, as everything else for us will be network based anyway, even user folders. I'm hoping to do a video of boot times comparisons between the 2011 and 2012 base models when we get them, as everyone who has done these comparisons has focused on the Fusion Drive.
Gosh, replacing 2011 hardware that runs on a network already? Our organisation has a ten year turn around on "Enterprise Windows hardware" - we too run a virtual network, and we are still using XP.
Lankyman is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 13, 2012, 04:09 AM   #74
Mr-Stabby
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lankyman View Post
Gosh, replacing 2011 hardware that runs on a network already? Our organisation has a ten year turn around on "Enterprise Windows hardware" - we too run a virtual network, and we are still using XP.
Oh no we're not that quick unfortunately. We just have a long update cycle like you have, we're just replacing two rooms of iMac G5's from 2004 that have been circling the drain for a couple of years now
Mr-Stabby is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 16, 2012, 03:29 PM   #75
erikbailey
Thread Starter
macrumors newbie
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Quote:
Originally Posted by erikbailey View Post
Thanks - that's exactly what I'm looking for. iTunes is a huge reason for this new machine, and it's sluggish enough on its own that I don't want anything slowing it down further.

At this point, I'm completely sold on the SSD. Odds are 90+% I'll do it via a mini, since the total cost is several hundred less than an equivalent iMac.
I wanted to update folks on what I ended up deciding on (after much back-and-forthing! :-))... Have ordered a base mini, with 128GB SSD (OCZ Vertex 4) to be installed next to the stock 500GB in a Fusion arrangement (with kit from ifixit), and 8GB RAM upgrade (Crucial). Monitor will be Dell U2412 (1920x1200). I have a LaCie 2x1TB TB RAID disk that I will use for storage beyond the internal.

This gives me what I need (solid media and file server that functions well as a family computer) as well as what I want (fast primary disk).

Thanks for all the help! --Erik
erikbailey is offline   0 Reply With Quote

Reply
MacRumors Forums > Apple Hardware > Desktops > iMac

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Similar Threads
thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Late 2012 imac bootcamp error"Non system disk, press any key to reboot" schrobro08 Windows, Linux & Others on the Mac 9 May 5, 2014 01:15 AM
iMac very slow - external disk boot patapple iMac 13 Nov 1, 2013 10:18 AM
Slow Disk Write speeds - MacBook Air 11" (2012) BradClarke MacBook Air 10 Jun 13, 2013 09:30 AM
iMac 21.5" - 5400rpm concerns. Should I cancel my order? appeardk iMac 8 Dec 1, 2012 08:27 PM

Forum Jump

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:22 PM.

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

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