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

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old Nov 4, 2012, 09:34 PM   #1
Roy G Biv
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
5400 rpm but faster speeds?

I'm wondering why they found much faster speeds with the hard drive if they're still 5400 rpm. I was worried coming from 7200 rpm would make a Mini feel slow, but this is good. Is it related to improved caching?

http://www.macworld.com/article/2013...-the-buck.html
Roy G Biv is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 4, 2012, 09:51 PM   #2
GGJstudios
macrumors Westmere
 
Join Date: May 2008
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roy G Biv View Post
I'm wondering why they found much faster speeds with the hard drive if they're still 5400 rpm. I was worried coming from 7200 rpm would make a Mini feel slow, but this is good. Is it related to improved caching?
There is more to drive performance than rotation speed. Many 5400 rpm drives are faster than many 7200 rpm drives, due to higher density.
GGJstudios is offline   3 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 5, 2012, 03:44 AM   #3
recursivetom
macrumors newbie
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
I just ran a speed test on my 2012 Mac Mini 5400RPM and I'm getting around 105-110MB/s transfer speeds which is around the same as the 7200RPM drive in my Macbook.
recursivetom is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 5, 2012, 03:01 PM   #4
tshrimp
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roy G Biv View Post
I'm wondering why they found much faster speeds with the hard drive if they're still 5400 rpm. I was worried coming from 7200 rpm would make a Mini feel slow, but this is good. Is it related to improved caching?

http://www.macworld.com/article/2013...-the-buck.html
If you can do it, I would put in an SSD. I did this on my Mid 2011 mini, and it was a different beast when I was done.
tshrimp is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 6, 2012, 09:53 AM   #5
Kaloman
macrumors newbie
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Apple should have used faster 7200 hdd instead of a pokier 5400.
Kaloman is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 6, 2012, 10:06 AM   #6
paulrbeers
macrumors 68040
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kaloman View Post
Apple should have used faster 7200 hdd instead of a pokier 5400.
Seriously, you really need to understand as previously stated that rpm's mean nothing.... Here's a great article to educate yourself with.

http://hothardware.com/Reviews/1TB-W...-HD-QuickTake/
__________________
MBP 8,2 15" 2.2Ghz w/ 120GB SSD + 500GB
MBA 6,2 13" 1.7Ghz w/ 256GB SSD
Mac Mini 6,2 2.3ghz w/ 240GB SSD + 1TB
Mac Pro 1,1 w/ 8 cores @ 2.66 w/ 240GB SSD
paulrbeers is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 6, 2012, 10:55 AM   #7
Kaloman
macrumors newbie
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
So they can get a 5400 hdd drive to be faster at 1 TB, but they can't get a 7200 hdd to be faster?
Kaloman is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 6, 2012, 01:00 PM   #8
CausticPuppy
macrumors 65816
 
Join Date: May 2012
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kaloman View Post
So they can get a 5400 hdd drive to be faster at 1 TB, but they can't get a 7200 hdd to be faster?
A 2.5" 5400rpm 1TB drive can be had for less than $100.

A 2.5" 7200rpm 1TB can be anywhere from $229-$300.

There may be a negligible performance increase, but not enough to justify the cost difference, especially when you can do a fusion drive instead.

Also, increased heat for the 7200rpm models.
__________________
2011 Mac Mini Server, 16 GB RAM, 256GB Crucial M4 SSD, 500GB HDD + 3TB NAS
Haswell rMBP 13" - i7/512GB
Mac Mini 1.83GHz Core2Duo, 3GB RAM, 60GB SSD
iPad Air/iPhone5S
CausticPuppy is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 6, 2012, 02:14 PM   #9
sean barry
macrumors member
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Belding, MI
I guess I'm missing something? I did not see in that review that the new 5400 HD was faster than the old 7200 HD? I thought the speed comparisons were about processors?
sean barry is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 6, 2012, 05:28 PM   #10
Kaloman
macrumors newbie
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Quote:
Originally Posted by sean barry View Post
I guess I'm missing something? I did not see in that review that the new 5400 HD was faster than the old 7200 HD? I thought the speed comparisons were about processors?
What brand of HDD is Mac using i the new Mini?
Kaloman is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 6, 2012, 11:19 PM   #11
dogmusic
macrumors member
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Ontario
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kaloman View Post
What brand of HDD is Mac using i the new Mini?
I think it's Hitachi.
dogmusic is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 8, 2012, 03:47 AM   #12
Roy G Biv
Thread Starter
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Yo, can't we all agree? Conflict creates confusion. Respeck.
Roy G Biv is offline   0 Reply With Quote

Reply
MacRumors Forums > Apple Hardware > Desktops > Mac mini

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:36 AM.

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

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